
L1BRARYOFCONGRESS 




Class. 



Book, 



/ 



VIEW OF THE ACTION 



FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, 



IN 



BEHALF OF SLAVERY, 



BY "WILLIAM JAY. 



"We, the People of the United States, do ordain and establish thi 

Constitution." — Federal Constitution. 



U T I C A 



PUBLISHED BY JAMES C J A 



1844. 







Entered according to the Act of Congress, in the year 1539, by 
WILLIAM JAY, 

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States, for the 
Southern District of New York. 



R W. ROBERTS, PRINTER, 

58 <;■ 

UTICA. 



I& 



iAVP 



VIEW, &c. 

Our Fathers in forming the Federal Constitution entered 
into a guilty compromise on the subject of Slavery, ancL 
heavily is their sin now visited upon their children. By that: 
instrument, the continuance of the African slave-trade was 
guaranteed for twenty years ; — a larger proportional repre- 
sentation in Congress and a larger vote in the election of the 
Executive, was accorded to the slave-holding, than to the 
other States : — the power of the nation was pledged to keep 
the slave in subjection ; and should he ever escape from his 
fetters, his master was authorized to pursue and to seize 
him, in any and every of the sovereign States, composing 
our wide-spread confederacy. 

We are not about to exhibit the corrupting influence of 
this compact on the religious sympathies and sentiments of 
our countrymen, in regard to slavery ; nor is it our present 
purpose to trace the retributive justice of Heaven in that 
recklessness of human life, and in that contempt of human 
and divine obligations, which are hurrying on the slave 
States to anarchy and barbarism ; or in the eagerness so 
generally exhibited by our northern politicians and mer- 
chants, to barter the constitutional rights of themselves and 
their fellow-citizens, for the votes and the trade of the South * 

We propose simply to take a view of the action of the Fed- 
eral Government in behalf of slavery, — a subject that has 
yet been but partially investigated ; and we flatter ourselves, 

* Before this language is condemned as harsh and exaggerated, we beg 
the reader to recall some of the prominent events of the last few years, con- 
nected with this subject: — the Lynch clubs and cruel inflictions of the 
South, — the packing of the Charleston post-office, — the wholesale and un- 
punished murders at Vicksburg, — and the frequent burnings alive of negroes, 
and in particular, of Mcintosh, taken by the citizens of St. Louis from the 
prison, chained to a tree, and consumed by a slow lire — and the advice of 
Judge Lawless to the grand j my, not to notice the diabolical atrocity, because 
it was in fact, the act of the community ! As to the North, we point in our 
Justification, to the innumerable mobs excited by politicians, against the 
friends of emancipation, — the various attempts made by the State authori- 
ties to propitiate the South, by a surrender of ihe freedom of speech, and of 
the press, — to the zeal of the merchants in our seaports, in getting up anti- 
abolition meetings, — to the conflagration of Pennsylvania Hall, and to the 
martyrdom of Lovejoy. In truth, our whole land is strewed with monuments 
of the wickedness and tyranny of slavery — monuments, which declare in no 
doubtful language, that our great national sin is not unheeded by Hnj 
whom vengeance belonseth. 



4 FEDERAL RATIO. 

that in the course of our inquiries, we shall develope facts, 
which, with some at least of our readers, will possess the 
merit of novelty. These facts for the most part, derive their 
origin from 

o 

The Federal Ratio of Representation. 

» The Constitution provides that the members of the Lower 
House of Congress shall be proportioned to the free inhabit- 
ants of the States they represent, except that in each State, 
three-fifths of the slave population shall be for this purpose 
considered as free inhabitants. In other words, every five 
slaves are to be counted as three white persons. For ex- 
ample, if by law every 60,000 free inhabitants may elect a 
representative, a district containing 45,000 whites and 25,- 
000 slaves, becomes by the federal ratio entitled to a mem- 
ber. This stipulation in the Constitution has from the be- 
ginning given the slaveholders an undue weight in the na- 
tional councils. A few instances will illustrate its practical 
effect.* The whole number of the House of Representa- 
tives is at present 242 ; sent from 26 States. 'Of these, the 
following are slave States, viz : — Delaware, Maryland, Vir- 

Note by J. C. Jackson. 

* At the time Judge Jay published his latest edition of the " View,'' the re- 
lative position of the North and South in Congress was different from what it 
is now. We think it best to let the text stand as it is, and insert in the form 
of a note the alterations which the last census and the apportionment law of 
1841, render it necessary to make. 

The whole number of Representatives in Congress is 275. Of these, the 
House contains 223, sent from 26 States; divided equally between the North 
and the South. At the last census, the slavcholding States had a free pop- 
ulation of 4,740,427, and a representation in the House under the new law 
of:];! members; while the free States with a population of 9,835,571 have 
only 135 members in the House. One representative is allowed to 70,6*80 
inhabitants, and in cases when the fraction exceeds 33,000, in a State, it 
draws an additional member. By this operation, Rhode Island, South Car- 
olina, Alabama, Tennessee, Indiana, and Illinois, each gain a member. 

Were the slaves not enumerated, the slave States would have but 67 mem- 
ber-; their number of slave Representatives is therefore 21. \i fres popu- 
lation were the basis of representation in the Federal Government, as it is in 
the majoritj .>.' the States, the slave States would have 

In the Senate, 13 members. 

In the House, 67 

tora! votes for President, CO 

They havo In the Senate, 26 members. 

In the House, B8 

Electoral votes for Pn sident, 1 14 

The operation of this principle is seen in the estimate below : 

Ohio with a population of 1,510, 465, has 21 members; while Vir 



FEDERAL RATIO. 5 

ginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, 
Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Missouri, and 
Arkansas. These States with a free population of 3,823,389, 
have 100 members; while the free States with a free popu- 
lation nearly double, viz. 7,003,451, have only 142 members. 
One representative is at present allowed to 47,700 inhabit- 
ants. Now were the slaves omitted in the enumeration, thu^ 
slave States would have only 75 members. Hence it follows^ 
that at the present moment, the slaveholding interest has a a 
representation of TWENTY-FIVE members in addition to f 
the fair and equal representation of the free inhabitants, j 
There is certainly no good reason why the owners of human < 
chattels, should by the fundamental law of a Republic, have 
greater privileges awarded to them than to the holders of 
any other kind of property whatever. But such is the com- \ 
pact; we seek not to change or violate it, but only to explain I 
its operation. 1 

Each State has as many votes for President as it has mem- 
bers of Congress. The rule of representation in the Lower 
House has already been explained; in the Senate it is differ- 
ent: and each State, whatever be its population, has two 
Senators, and no more. The free population of the slave i 
States, as already stated, is /^Zf that of the others ; but their 
number being equal, their representation in the Senate is also ♦ 
equal. 

If free population were the principle of representation in 
the Federal Government, as it is with scarcely an exception 
in all the States, the slave States would have 

In the Senate, 13 members. 

In the House, 75 

Electoral votes for President, SS 

They have In the Senate, 26 members. 

In the House, 100 

Electoral votes for President, 126 

Here we find the secret of the power of the South, and of 
the obsequiousness of the North. Ohio, with a population 

with a free white population of 720,050, less than half that of Ohio, ha* 
15 members; when on the principle of equal representation she would he 
entitled to but 10 members. Pennsylvania has 20 electoral votes; while 
South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Kentucky, 
with a free population of only 203,032 more than Pennsylvania, have .">.' 
electoral votes. 



6 INFLUENCE IN CONGRESS. 

of 947,000, has 19 members ; while Virginia with a free 
population of 200,000, less, has two members more. Take 
another example. Pennsylvania has 30 electoral votes; the 
States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, 
Louisiana, and Kentucky, with an aggregate free population 
of 189,791 less than Pennsylvania, have 53 electoral votes! 

fit cannot be supposed that this vast and most unequal 
Representation and consequent political power, will be un- 
employed by its possessors. On the contrary, the slavehold- 
er- in Congress have uniformly succeeded in effecting their 
objects, when united among themselves. In 1S36, this slave 
power in Congress was adroitly turned to pecuniary profit. 
The Surplus Revenue remaining in the Treasury on the 1st 
of January, 1837, was to be distributed, and the rule of dis- 
tribution became a question. The income, it is true, had 
f been derived chiefly from the industry and enterprise of the 
/ North , but the South insisted, and with her usual success, 
• that instead of dividing the money according to population, 
"it should be apportioned among the States according to their 
electoral votes. By this rule, the slave States, notwithstanding 
their inferiority in population, would share alike with the 
. free, so far as regarded the number of their Senators; and 
| with regard to their representatives, they would secure an 
I apportionment of money on account of three-fifths of their 
two millions of slaves. 

The sum allotted by this gross and monstrous rule to the 
States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, 
Louisiana, and Kentucky, was $6,754,588 ; while Pennsyl- 
vania with a free population larger than that of all these six 
States together, was to receive only 83,823,353 ; so that in 
fact the slaveholders of these States received man for man, 
just about twice as many dollars from the national Treas- 
ury, as the hardworking citizens of Pennsylvania! Now as 
the free States have a numerical majority of members, it is 
important to investigate the sources of the. slaveholbing 
INFLUENCE i\ Congress. These m«y be regarded as three- 
fold; first, their anxiety to protect and perpetuate slavery, 
renders the southern members united in whatever measures 
they consider important for this purpose, while the repre- 
sentatives from the North, having no common bond of union, 
are divided in opinion and effort. Secondly, a slave State 
haying more votes to bestow on a presidential candidate, and 
more members in Congress to support or oppose the admin- 
istration than a free State of equal white population, is of 
course of greater consequence in the estimation of politi- 



[ f 



INTIMIDATION* 7 

cians; and hence arises an influence reaching to every mea- 
sure, and weighing upon every question. The peculiar 
character of the southern gentlemen, together with their ob- 
servation of the servility of the northern politicians, have in- 
duced them to resort, and with great success, to intimida- 
tion as a third means of influence. 

The practice adopted by the slaveholder? of threatening 
on all occasions to dissolve the Union, unless they are per- 
mitted to govern it, has been too long and firmly established 
to need illustration. "We will at present merely give a few 
recent instances of outrageous menaces and to justify what 
we have said of the servility of northern politicians, it is suf- 
ficient to observe, that these menaces were unrebuked. 

On the 18th of April, 1S36, a petition against the contin 
uance of slavery in the District of Columbia was presented 
to the House of Representatives, when Mr. Speight of 
North Carolina declared in his place, that "he had great re- 
spect for the chair as an officer of the House, and a great 
respect for him personally, and nothing hut that respect pre 
vented him from rushing to the table and tearing that petition 
to pieces." Of course it was to be understood, that the order 
of the House and the rights of northern petitioners were re- 
spected not from any constitutional obligations, but solely 
because the speaker, himself a slaveholder, was acceptable 
to southern gentlemen. 

Mr. Hammond of South Carolina, the same session, in a 
speech, used the following language: " I Warn the Abolition- 
ists, ignorant, infatuated barbarians as they are, that if chance 
shall throw any of them into our hands, he may expect a 
felon's death" 

Mr. Lumpkin remarked in the Senate, (January, 1S3S,) 
"If Abolitionists went to Georgia, they would be caitght:" 
and Mr. Preston declared in the same debate— y* Let an r _ 
Abolitionist come within the borders of South Carolina, if we V 
can catch him, we will try him, and notwithstanding all the ^ 
interference of all the governments on earth, including the ^/ 
Federal Goveonment, we will HANG him."/ 

It seems probable from these declaration/that Abolition- 
ists, in their southern travels, will meet with " barbarians" 
quite as " ignorant and infatuated " as themselves ; and also, 
that should members of Congress, by their votes, imprudent- 
ly identify themselves with Abolitionists, and afterwards enter 
the slave region, they could not complain of not having been 
explicitly warned that the gibbet was to be their fate. 

Such are the sources of the slaveholding influence in Con- 



S PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES. 

gress. The following pages will exhibit many of the results 
of this influence, and the first to which the readers attention 
is called, is 

The Obsequiousness of the Presidential Candidates. 

As slaveholders are ready to hang Abolitionists when they 
can "catch" them, it is not to be supposed that they will 
elect any of the proscribed sect, President of the United 
States. Of course, it becomes important for such gentlemen 
as aspire to that honor, that their ideas on the subject of hu- 
man rights, should be adapted to the meridian of the slave 
region. 

Previous to the last presidential canvass, Mr. Van Buren 
■being a candidate, thought it prudent to write a letter for 
* publication, containing the following passage:— -"I prefer 
J that not only you, but all the people of the United States, 
| shall now understand, that if the desire of that portion of 
^ them which is favorable to my election to the chief magis- 
tracy should be gratified, I must go into the presidential 
chair the inflexible and micomjiromising oj?ponent of any at- 
tempt on the part of Congress to abolish slavery in the Dis- 
trict of Columbia, against ilic loishcs of the slaveholding 
States." 

Mr. White was a rival candidate, and deemed it expedi- 
I ent to give his pledge also, which he did in these terms : — 

1" I do not believe Congress has the power to abolish slavery 
in the District of Columbia; and if that body did possess the 
power, I think the exercise of it would be the very worst 
policy. Holding these opinions, I would act on them in any 
situation in which I could be placed, and for both reasons 
would, if called on to act, withhold my assent to any bill hav- 
ing in view such an object." 
. ^ General Harrison, a third candidate, also as we have 
^ understood, wrote his letter, but not having it before us can- 
not quote it. We presume, however, it was thought suffi- 
^ cient, since an address in his behalftfrom his political friends 
in Virginia, assured the public that " he is sound to the core 
on the subject of si or cry. " 

Mr. Webster, the fourth and last candidate, had many 
years before fully committed himself as to the power of 
Congress over slavery in the District. Ho gave no pledge, 
and received no vote from any slave State. 

Having thus seen the extent of tho slaveholding power in 
Congress, and in some degree, its influence over political 
partizans, we are prepared to investigate its direct action in 



OPPRESSION OF FREE NEGROES. 9 

protecting and perpetuating the institution of slavery in the 
United States. The friends of that institution have always 
looked with distrust and alarm upon the free colored people, 
and have deemed it good policy to treat them with ignominy, 
and to prevent their acquisition of power and influence: 
Hence the 

Efforts of the Federal Government to oppress and 
degrade the free people of color. 

The Constitution of the United States acknowledges no 
right or disqualification founded on complexion ; but those 
who have administered it, have made the tincture of the skm, 
of far greater importance than the qualities of either the 
head or the heart. So early as 1790, Congress passed an 
act prescribing the mode in which "any alien being a white 
person," might be naturalized and admitted to the rights of 
an American citizen. ^ * 

Two years after, an act was passed for organizing the mi- 
litia, which was to consist of "each and every free, able- 
bodied white male citizen," &c. No other government on 
earth prohibits any portion of its citizens from participating 
in the national defence ; and this strange and degrading pro- 
hibition, utterly repugnant both to the principles of the Dec- 
laration of Independence and of the Constitution, marks the 
solicitude of the Federal Government to pursue the policy 
most agreeable to the slaveholders. But not content with 
this insult to colored citizens, another, and perhaps a still 
more wanton and malignant one, was offered by the Govern- 
ment in the act of 1810, organizing the Post Office Depart- 
ment. The 4th Section enacts that "no other than a free 
white person shall be employed in carrying the mail of the 
United States, either as a post-rider or driver of a carriage 
carrying the mail," under a penalty of fifty dollars. 

Any vagabond from Europe, any fugitive from our own 
prisons, may take charge of the United States mail; but a 
native born American citizen, of unimpeachable morals, and 
with property acquired by honest industry, may not, if his 
skin be dark, guide the horses which draw the carriage in 
which a bag of newspapers is deposited! 

Such are the insults heaped by the Federal Government 
on the colored citizens throughout the States: let us see what 
conduct it pursues towards them on its own territory, over 
which it possesses " exclusive jurisdiction." 

In 1820, Congress passed a law authorizing the white 
citizens of the City of Washington to elect white city offi- 



10 SLAVERY UNDER THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 

cers; thus making a white skin an indispensable qualification 
for both suffrage and office. The white officers thus elected 
by the while citizens, were specially empowered by the Na- 
tional Legislature " to prescribe the terms and conditions on 
which free negroes and mulattoes may reside in the city" In 
pursuance of this grant of power, the white officers passed 
an ordinance (May 31, 1827,) requiring all the free colored 
persons then in Washington and wishing to remain, to be 
registered; and enacting, that if any free man with a colored 
skin should presume to play at cards, or even to be jrrcsent 
while another free colored person was playing, he should be 
fined not exceeding five dollars ; that if he should have a 
dance in his house, without permission from the white Mayor, 
he should be fined not exceeding ten dollars ; that should he 
take the liberty to go out of his own house after ten o'clock 
at night, without a pass from a Justice of tire Peace, or 
/'some respectable citizen," (!) he might be compelled to 
pass the rest of the night " in a lock-up house," and the next 
morning be fined ten dollars ; and should any dark complex- 
ioned free man be guilty of drunkenness or profane lan- 
guage, he should be fined not exceeding three dollars. Thus 
we see with what zeal the Washington Corporation endea- 
vors to prevent the colored citizens from affecting the man- 
ners and fashions of their white brethren. But there are 
still more serious matters. A colored citizen from any of 
the States, taking up his residence in the Capital of the Re- 
public, is required within a certain time, not only to be re- 
gistered, but also to find two freehold sureties in the penalty 
of five hundred dollars, for his good behavior; and if he 
does not, he is to be imprisoned till he consents to leave the 
seat of the Federal Government; and if he does not prove 
that he is a freeman, he shall be sold as a slave to pay his 
jail firs! ! 

.Such are the abominable and iniquitous means used by 
and with the sanction of Congress, for the degradation and 
oppression of colored citizens. We are next to take a view of 

Slavery under tjie authority of the Federal Gov- 
ernment. 

It is well known that Congress is the local Legislature of 
the District of Columbia, and of all the territories belonging 
to the Union, and with powers far exceeding those possessed 
by any State Legislature, being unfettered with constitutional 
restrictions. The authority vested in Congress over the 
District and territories, is virtually despotic, being an "ex- 



RECOVERY OF FUGITIVES. 11 

elusive jurisdiction in all cases whatsoever." Yet we have 
long had slaveholding territories. The vast domain acquir- 
ed by the purchase of Louisiana, has, under the authority 
of* Congress, been stocked with slaves, excepting so much 
as is north of 3SJ degrees north latitude, which is, by act of 
Congress, specially protected from the pollution. This very 
law is one of the most profligate and decided acts of the 
Federal Government in behalf of slavery; for by means of 
it, the immense territory south of this line was deliberately 
surrendered to all the cruelties and abominations of the sys- 
tem: it was moreover an express acknowledgment by the 
Government of its power to prohibit slavery throughout the 
whole territory, and that it had made a compromise, a bar- 
gain between humanity and cruelty, religion and wicked- 
ness; and had erected on an arbitrary line, a partition wall 
between slavery and liberty. 

But it is in the District of Columbia, and under the shadow 
of the proud Capitol, that the action of the Federal Govern- 
ment in behalf of slavery, is exhibited in its most odious and 
disgusting forms. We shall have occasion presently to ex- 
hibit the seat of the National Government, as the great slave 
mart of the North American Continent, "furnished with all 
appliances and means to boot." The old slave laws of Vir- 
ginia and Maryland, marked by the barbarity of other days, 
form by Act of Congress, the slave code of the District. Of 
this code, a single sample will suffice. A slave convicted of 
setting fire to a building, shall have his head cut off, and his 
body divided into quarters, and the parts set up in the most 
public places! But let it not be supposed that Congress 
has not itself legislated directly on the subject of slavery. 
An Act of 15th May, 1S20, gives the Corporation of Wash- 
ington, power to ''punish corporeally any slave for a breach 
of any of their ordinances." Happy would it have been for 
the honor of our country, if the sympathies of its rulers in 
behalf of slavery, had been exhibited only on the national 
domain; but they pervade every portion of the confederacy, 
as is but too apparent in 
The interference of the Federal Government for 

the recovery of fugitive slaves. 
The Federal Constitution contains the following clause: 
" No person held to service or labor in one State under the 
laws thereof, escaping into another, shall in consequence of 
any law or regulation therein be discharged from such ser- 
vice or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party 
to whom such service or labor may be due." 



12 RECOVERY OF FUGITIVES. 

At the time this Constitution was adopted, the cultivation 
and manufacture of cotton had not so far progressed, as to 
paralyze by their profits, the conscience of the nation, or to 
divest it of the sense of shame; and hence this clause, al- 
though relating to slaves, forbears to name them. It was 
inserted to satisfy the South; and its obvious meaning is, 
that slaves escaping into States in which slavery is abolished 
by law, shall not therefore be deemed free by the State au- 
thorities, but shall be delivered by those authorities, to his 
master. This clause imposes an obligation on the States, 
but confers no power on Congress; and the Constitution 
moreover declares, that " the powers not delegated to the 
United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to 
the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the 
people." Hence it follows that as the power of recovering 
these fugitives is not delegated to Congress, it is reserved to 
the several States, who are bound to make such laws as may 
be deemed proper, to authorize the master to recover his 
slave. Nevertheless, the Federal Government in its zeal for 
slavery, has not scrupled to assume power never delegated 
to it, and has exercised that power in gross and contemptu- 
ous violation of every principle, which in free countries, di- 
rects the administration of justice. If a Virginian enters 
New York, and claims as his property ahorse which he finds 
in the possession of one of our citizens, an impartial jury is 
selected to pass on his claim, — witnesses are orally, and 
publicly examined, — the claimant is debarred from all 
private intercourse with the jury, — he may not be alone 
with them for a moment, nor may a whisper pass between 
them; and when the trial is over, the jury retire to deliber- 
ate on their verdict, under the charge of an officer, who. is 
sworn to keep them apart, and not to suffer any "person to 
speak with them ; nor can the horse be at last recovered but 
with the unanimous consent of the jury. But let the Vir- 
ginian claim, not the horse, but the CITIZEN HIMSELF 
as his beast of burden, and the Federal Government makes 
all things easy for him. By the Act of 1793, the slaveholder 
may himself without oath, or process of any kind, seize his 
prey, where he can find him, and at his leisure, (for no time 
is specified,) drag him before any Justice of the Peace* in 
the place, whom he may prefer. This Justice is a State 

* In New York the Legislature has interfered, and forbidden a Justice of 
the Peace to act, and has therefore virtually declared the Act of Congress in 
Be unconstitutional, — and that the power of prescribing the mode in which 
fugitives shall be restored, belongs exclusively to the States. 



RECOVERY OP FUGITIVES. 13 

officer, and of the lowest judicial grade, and under no legal 
obligation to execute an Act of Congress, and entitled to no 
fees for his services. He is therefore peculiarly accessible 
to improper influences. Before this magistrate, who is not 
authorized to compel the attendance of witnesses in such a 
case, the slaveholder brings his victim, and if he can satisfy 
this judge of his own choice, "by oral testimony or affidavit" 
and for aught that appears in the law, by his own oath, that 
his claim is well founded, the wretched prisoner is surren- 
dered to him as a slave for life, torn from his wife and chil- 
dren, bereft of all the rights of humanity, and converted into 
a chattel, — an article of merchandise, — a beast of burden ! ! 
The Federal Constitution declares : — " In suits at com- 
mon law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty 
dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved ;" but 
the Act of 1793, in suits in which " the value in controversy" 
exceeds all estimation, dispenses with trial by jury, and in- 
deed with almost every safeguard of justice and personal 
liberty. 

This law, iniquitous as it is, does not require State officers 
to anticipate the pursuit of the slaveholder, and to seize and 
imprison their fellow-men, on mere suspicion that they may 
be claimed as slaves. What the Federal Government dares 
not do in the States, it accomplishes on its own exclusive 
territory, and in a manner which, for atrocious wickedness 
and tyranny, leaves far in the shade the vilest acts of Euro- 
pean despotism. This is indeed strong language; but alas! 
language is too feeble adequately to represent the turpitude 
of the laws and practices sanctioned by the Federal Gov- 
ernment, in the District under its " exclusive jurisdiction." 

By the Act of 1793, a Justice can take no step for the re- 
storation of a fugitive slave, till the fact of his being one is 
proved before him on oath. But in the Metropolis of the 
Nation, — in the city called by the name of the Father of 
his Country, a Justice of the Peace may commit to the Uni- 
ted States Prison, and into the custody of the United 
States Marshal, any man he may choose to suspect of 
being a fugitive slave. Notice is then given in the newspa- 
pers of the commitment, and the unknown owner is warned 
to take away his property, or it will be sold according to 
law, to pay JAIL FEES. 

After the doors of the dungeon have closed upon the vic- 
tim, no magistrate, no court, no jury take cognizance of his 
claims to freedom. The jailor is the only tribunal to which 
he can appeal, and how disinterested a tribunal will presently 



14 SALE OF FREE NEGROES. 

be seen. If a freeman, no master can of course, lawfully 
claim him, and not being claimed, he is sold at auction to 
raise money to pay an officer of the Federal Government for 
the trouble and expense of keeping him a few weeks in 
prison. What civilized government of the old world prac- 
tices more execrable wickedness ]* 

The whole depth of this villainy is not yet sounded. The 
disclosures we are now about making should make every ear 
to tingle and every heart to quake. No doubt it will occur 
to many that if a free man, all the prisoner has to do, to ob- 
tain his liberation, is to prove his freedom. Prove his free- 
dom while locked up in his cell ! Where is his counsel % 
— where his process for commanding the attendance of wit- 
nesses'? — where the court sitting in open day to investigate 
his right to freedom? — where the jury to pass upon his case! 
The marshal, or his deputy the jailor, is the only human 
being, except his fellow-victims, to whom he can tell his tale. 
The marshal is the judge, and the sole jud^e of his prisoner's 
title to freedom. He is the arbiter of happiness and misery, 
of liberty and bondage: he opens the door of the dungeon, 
and at his sovereign will bids his captive go forth to enjov 
the rights and fulfil the duties of a rational, accountable, and 
immortal being, or conducts him to the human shambles 
erected in the city of Washington, and there sells him under 
the hammer as a slave for life. Compared with this tre- 
mendous jurisdiction, the powers vested in the highest judi- 
cial officer in our country dwindle into insignificance. And 
should such a judge be disinterested I The very question is 
shocking to our every idea of justice. Disinterested! — 
Screened from the public eye — accountable only to that 
Being who seeth in secret — declaring his judgment in the 
recesses of the prison, he should of all men be most exempt 
from human passion and infirmity. Yet to this judge the lute 
offers a high and tempting bribe to sell men he knows to be 
free, and thus to become a manufacturer of slaves. Will tin- 
statement be credited 1 It cannot, and ought not to be, 

lot as an apology for this expression, but as a reason why the writer 
feels more sensibly than perhaps many others on this subject, he thinks pro- 
per-to mention, that a free colored man belonging to his neighborhood in 
Westchester County, N. Y., on going to Washington sum.' \ ears since, was 
there legally kidnapped, and advertised by the marshal to be sold to pay his 
jail fees. A Washington paper containing the advertisement providentially 
fell into the hands of a citizen of the County who knew the man. A public 
meeting was called, and the Governor of the State. De Witt Clinton, ai 
request, demanded from the President his immediate release as a citi. e 
New York. 



SALE OF FREE NEGROES. 15 

without full and unequivocal proof, and to that proof we now 
appeal; premising for the better understanding of our proof, 
that the marshal is required to maintain the suspected fugi- 
tives while in his custody and is entitled to fees for receiving 
them, &c, and if unreclaimed has no means of procuring 
payment of his expenses and fees but from the proceeds of 
the sale of his prisoners; and further, that the ichole of those 
proceeds are permitted by law to remain in his pocket, un- 
less after the sale the master should be discovered, and 
should claim the balance. 

On the 11th January, 1S27, the committee on the District 
of Columbia, to whom the subject had been referred by the 
House of Representatives, reported that "in this District, as 
in all the slaveholding States in the Union, the legal pre- 
sumption is, that persons of color going at large without 
any evidences of their freedom, are absconding slaves, and 
prima facie, liable to all the legal provisions applicable to 
that class of persons." They state that in the part of the 
District ceded by Virginia, a free negro may be arrested 
and put in jail for three months on suspicion of being a fugi- 
tive; he is then to be hired out to pay his jail fees ; and if 
he does not prove his freedom within twelve months, is to 
be sold as a slave. This statement is followed by the re- 
mark, "the committee do not consider any alteration of the 
law in the County of Alexandria in relation to this subject, 
necessary!" In the County of Washington, ceded by Ma- 
ryland, they inform us, " If a free man of color should be 
apprehended as a runaway, he is subjected to the payment 
of all fees and reivards given by law for apprehending runa- 
ways; and upon failure to make such payment, is liable to 
be sold as a slave." That is, a man achwicledgcd to he free, 
and unaccused of any offence, is to be sold as a slave to pay 
the "fees and rewards given by law for apprehending ruu- 
au-ai/s." If Turkish despotism is disgraced by any enact- 
ment of equal atrocity, we are ignorant of the fact. Even 
the committee thought this law rather hard, and therefore 
they "recommended such an alteration of it as would make 
such charges payable by the Corporation of Washington."* 
But the Federal Government, unwavering in its devotion to 
slavery, made no alteration, and the code of Washington is 
to this day polluted by unquestionably the most iniquitous 
statute in Christendom. Laws are sometimes more profli- 
gate than those who are called to administer them, and the 
committee assure us that the marshal has in all cases re~ 

* See Reports of Committees, 2 Scss. 19 Cong. Vol. I. No. 13. 



16 SALE OF FREE NEGROES. 

frained from selling his prisoners for fees and charges, when 
their rights to freedom have been established ; and in conse- 
quence of not availing himself of the privilege allowed him 
by this law, he had incurred, in the last eight years, a per- 
sonal loss of 8500! In other words, the marshal's sense of 
justice, decency, and humanity, exceeded that of the rulers 
of our Republic. 

On the 29th of January, 1829, the committee on the Dis- 
trict of Columbia made a report in obedience to the instruc- 
tions of the House of Representatives, "to inquire into the 
slave-trade as it exists in and is carried on through the Dis- 
trict." The Report proposes no interference on the part of 
Congress, but is virtually an apology for this vile traffic, as 
is apparent from the following heartless sentiments and false 
assertions. 

" The trade alluded to, is presumed to refer more partic- 
ularly to that which is carried on with the view of transport- 
ing slaves to the South, which is one way of gradually dimin- 
ishing the evil complained of here; while the situation of 
these £>ersons is considerably mitigated by being transplanted 
to a more genial and bountiful clime. Although violence 
may sometimes be done to their feelings in the separation of 
families, it is by the laws of society which operate upon them 
as property, and cannot be avoided as long as they exist; 
yet it should be some consolation to those whose feelings are 
interested in their behalf, to know that their condition is more 
frequently bettered, and their minds happier by the exchange"* 

To this report is appended a letter (January 13, 1S29,) 
from the marshal to the committee, containing most import- 
ant and heart-rending statements. It appears from this let- 
ter, that from the 1st January, 1826, to 1st January, 1828, 
there were committed to the Washington prison as runa- 
ways, 101. 

Proved to be free, and discharged, 15 

Unclaimed, and sold for maintenance, and charges! 

and fees, 5 

Proved to be slaves, and delivered to their masters, SI 

101 

In 1S2S — Committed as runaways, 78. 
Proved to be free, 11 

Unclaimed, or sold for jail fees, etc. 1 

Delivered to their masters, 66 

78 

# Reports of Committees, 2 Sess. Q0 Cong. No. (JO. 



BALE OF FREE NEGROES. 



17 



Here then is proof, official documentary proof, that in 
three years, 179 human beings were> by the authority of the 
Federal Government, arrested in one county of the District, 
and committed to prison on no allegation of crime, but mere- 
ly to aid the slaveholders in trampling upon those great prin- 
ciples of human rights, for the protection of which the Na- 
tional Government was professedly founded. It is also in 
proof that of these 179 prisoners, 26 were, by the confession 
of the Marshal, free men ; men whom (as appears from the 
report we have quoted,) he had a legal right to consign to 
hopeless and awful bondage, merely because they were too 
poor to pay the expenses of their unjust imprisonment; and 
who were indebted for their liberty, not to the laws and con- 
stitution of their country, but to the beneficence of their 
jailor — a beneficence too, exercised at his own pecuniary 
loss. Proof also is here given, that six persons unclaimed 
as slaves, were, by the judgment of this same jailor, without 
counsel, witnesses, or trial, sentenced to be sold as slaves for 
the purpose of raising money, the w r hole of which, as we 
shall presently see, was paid over to the judge who pronoun- 
ced the sentence. The Marshal gives in his letter the par- 
ticulars of the sale of the five unclaimed negroes, as follows, 
viz: Si — Amount of jail fees, etc. $84 S2 

Offered for sale according to law, and no person 
being willing to give $84 82, he was purchased by 
.Tench Ringgold, the Marshal, for that sum, and 
afterwards sold by him to Robert Brown for $20> 
by which the Marshal lost, 64 52 

Hannah Green sold for 
Maintenance, etc. 

Balance remaining in Marshal's hands, 

Lewis Davis sold for 
Amount of fees, etc. 

Balance remaining in Marshal's hands, 

James Green sold for 
Fees and maintenance, 

Balance remaining in Marshal's hands, 

Arthur Neal sold for amount of his jail fees and 

maintenance, to the Marshal, being 
Sold afterwards by private sale to J. G. Hutton for 

Lost by Marshal, 



$61 

48 


00 
71 


$12 29 


$250 00 
50 07 


$199 


93 


$S0 00 
49 G6 


S30 


34 


$46 

40 


06 
00 



606 06 



18 SALE OF FREE NEGROES. 

The letter concludes thus: "The Marshal lias always con- 
sidered it to be his duty whenever a negro was committed 
as a runaway by a Justice of the Peace, who in all cases 
under the law commits them, which negro had not in his 
possession proof of his freedom, but alleged himself to be a 
freeman, to write to any part of the United States to persons 
who the negro affirmed could prove his freedom, urging 
them to send on their certificates of such negro being free; 
and in many instances, these letters of the Marshal or his 
jailor have been the means of bringing proof that the negro 
was free. 

" The law of Maryland in force in this District, directs 
that the balance of sales of negroes (sold as runaways) shall 
remain in the Marshal's hands until the runaway was identi- 
fied as the property of some master; and in conformity there- 
to, the Marshal has uniformly handed over such balance 
whenever the master proved his properly. In a late case. 
Mr. Sprigg of Louisiana, lost a valuable slave, who escaped 
from him, and made his way to this District, and was com- 
mitted to my custody, advertised and sold, according to law ; 
leaving a balance of five hundred dollars, after paving main- 
tenance, etc., in my hands. The negro was carried to Lou- 
isiana by the person who purchased him of me, discovered 
by his former master, Mr. Sprigg, who sent on here and 
claimed his money. Having ascertained that this negro was 
the property of Mr. Sprigg, I paid the 8500 on demand to 
his agent here, Mr. Josktb Johnson, Senator of Congress from 
that Slate. Tench RinggolB, Marshal, Dist. Col." 

Such are the secrets of the prison-house, established by 
the Federal Government. It may be well to contemplate 
them iri detail. ' It appears from the cases of Si and Neat.. 
that the Marshal of the United States after deciding on the 
liberty or bondage of his prisoners, is allowed to take his 
fees in human flesh, and the condemned becomes the proper- 
ty of the very Judge who sentenced him to servitude, and 
who carries him into the market there to make out of him 
as much money as he can. True it is. Mr. IJinggpld's spec- 
ulations appear not to have been very productive, but other 
jailor judges may have less honesty, or more skill in negro 
flesh. The Marshal it seems sold his fees in the shape of 
Sr, for only $2Gt .No reason is assigned for this nominal 
price. Very probably it was a [ilar to the one de- 

scribed by Mr. Miner, in his speech on theiloor of the House 
of Representatives, in 1S29. "In August, IS:?!/' said Mr. 
INI., " a black man was taken up, and imprisoned as a runa- 



SALE OF FREE NEGROES. 10 

-way. He was kept confined until October, 1S22, four hun- 
dred and five days. In this time, vermin, disease, and mise- 
ry had deprived him of the use of his limbs. He was ren- 
dered a cripple for life, and finally discharged, as no oncicoi'ld 
buy him." 

The Hannah and James Green sold for fees, were most 
likely man and wife, and may remind us that the law we are 
considering is utterly reckless of the most sacred relations. 
The proceeds of three of the five sold in 1S26-7, after de- 
ducting fees, &c. is $2 12,56, and this sum, according to law, 
the Marshal retains till called for ; but if the negroes were 
free, then, there being no claimant, the money can never 1 e 
called for, and becomes the perquisite of office, and the in- 
come of the Judge of course fluctuates according to the num- 
ber of freemen he condemns to slavery. Tims does the law 
literally press upon the Marshal the wages of unrighteous- 
ness — thus does it bribe him to the commission of wicked- 
ness. In one instance, the receipts of a single condemna- 
tion were 850 0, of which the Marshal was deprived only by 
a most extraordinary accident. 

And now let us review the conduct of the Federal Gov- 
ernment towards the free colored citizen of any State, who 
presumes to visit the city of Washington. At the will of a 
Justice of the Peace he is thrown into prison. His jailor, if 
he possesses the humanity and disinterestedness of Mr. Ring- 
gold, may, if he pleases, write letters to distant parts of the 
confederacy, although he knows that a favorable answer may 
keep some hundred dollars from finding their way into his 
pocket. If no such answer arrives, without any evidence 
that the letter of inquiry was ever received, the poor wretch 
is condemned as a slave, and the price of his bones and mus- 
cles is paid to the Judge who condemned him. 

And by whom is this accursed law kept in force 1 By 
Northern Representatives and Senators in Congress. On the 
8th February, 1836, the House of Representatives resolved, 
that " Congress ought not to interfere in any way with slavery 
in the District of Columbia," and no less than 82 Northern 
men had the hardihood to record their names in favor of 
the resolution. To place if possible, in a still stronger tight, 
the conduct of these men, it may be mentioned that the law 
we have been considering, belonged to the code of Mary- 
land, at the time the District was ceded, and was continued 
in force by Act of Congress. In the meantime, the L< 
lature of Maryland, composed of slaveholders, yielding" to 
the spirit of the age, has erased this foul stain from her stat- 



20 SALE OP FREE NEGROES. 

ute-book, while our Northern Democrats with liberty and 
equality forever on their lips, in the hope of getting a few 
Southern votes for their party, discover that Congress ought 
not to interfere in any way with slavery in the District, al- 
though it is by the authority of Congress that freemen are 
converted into slaves. 

We will now place side by side, two advertisements, one 
published by authority of Congress, in which Northern men 
have the majority; the other by authority of the slave State 
of Maryland, — the first relating to a woman and infant 
claiming to be free, the other to a man confessing himself 

a SLAVE. 

"Notice. — Was committed to the jail of Washington 
county, District of Columbia, as a runaway, a negro woman, 
by the name of Polly Leiper, and her infant child William ; 
she is five feet four inches high, about twenty-three years of 
age. She had on when committed * * * * Says she 
was set free by John Campbell, of Richmond, Va., in ISIS 
or 1819. The owner of the above-described icoman and 
child, if any, are requested to come and prove them, and 
take them away, or they will be sold for their jail fees 

AND OTHER EXPENSES AS THE LAW DIRECTS. 

May 19, 1827. Tench Ringgold, Marshal" 

" Ranaway. — Was committed to the jail of Washington 
county, Maryland, on the 24th December last, a mulatto 
man who calls himself John McDanicl, about 25 years of age. 

* * Says he belongs to William Hill, living at Falmouth, 
Va., and was sold to John Daily, living somewhere in the 
South. The owner of the said slave is requested to come 
and take him away, or he will be released according to law. 
Christian Newcomb, Jan., Sheriff." 

December 10, 1S27 * 

The endeavors of the Federal Government to secure the 
restoration of fugitive slaves to their masters, is not confined 
either to the District of Columbia, or to the States of this 
confederacy. Even American diplomacy must be made sub- 
servient to the interests of the slaveholders, and republican am- 
bassadors must bear to foreign courts the wailings of our gov- 
ernment for the escape of human property. 

On the 10th of May, 1S2S, the House of Representatives 
requested the President "to open a negotiation with the 
British Government in the view to obtain an arrangement 
whereby fugitive slaves who have taken refuge in the Cana- 

*Both advertisements are taken from the Washington Intelligencer. 



FUGITIVES IN CANADA. 21 

dian provinces of that government, may be surrendered by 
the functionaries thereof to their masters, upon making sat- 
isfactory proof of their ownership of said slaves." 

Here was a plain, palpable interference in behalf of slave- 
ry by a government which we are often assured by the slave- 
holders "has nothing to do with slavery;" and so tame and 
subservient were the northern members, that this disgraceful 
resolution was adopted without even a division of the House ! 
At the next session, the impatience of the slaveholders to 
know if Great Britain would restore their slaves who had 
taken refuge in Canada, could brook no longer delay, and 
the House called on the President to inform them of the re- 
sult of the negotiation. The President immediately sub- 
mitted a mass of documents to the House, from which it ap- 
peared that the zeal of the Executive, in behalf of " the pe- 
culiar institution," had anticipated the wishes of the Legis- 
lature. Two years before the interference of the House, 
viz : on the 19th of June, 1826, Mr. Clay, Secretary of State, 
had instructed Mr. Gallatin, American Minister, in London, 
to propose a stipulation for "a mutual surrender of all per- 
sons held to service or labor under the laws of either party 
who escape into the territories of the other." Mr. Clav 
dwelt on the number of fugitives in Canada, and desired 
Mr. Gallatin to press on the British Government the consid- 
eration that such a stipulation, would secure to the West In- 
dia planters the recovery of such of their slaves as might take 
refuge in the American RejntJAic ! 

Surely the Federal Government w T as never intended by its 
founders to act the part of kidnapper for West India slave- 
holders. 

On the 24th of February, 1827, Mr. Clay again urged Mr. 
Gallatin to procure this stipulation, and informed him that a 
treaty had just been concluded with Mexico, by which that 
power had engaged to restore our runairay slaves* 

On the 5th July, 1S27, Mr. Gallatin communicated to his 
government the answer of the British Minister, that "it was 
utterly impossible for them to agree to a stipulation for the 
surrender of fugitive slaves." 

Determined not to take no for an answer, Mr. Clay desi- 
red Mr. Barbour, our then Minister in England, to renew 
the negotiation, inasmuch as the escape of slaves into Cana- 
da is " a growing evil;" but alas! Mr. Barbour replied that 
on broaching the subject to the British Minister, he had in- 

1 * Such a treaty was negotiated, but the Mexican Congress refused to rat- 
ify the base compact. 



22 FUGITIVES IN FLORIDA. 

formed him u the law of ' "Parliament gave freedom to every 
slave who effected his landing on British ground^* To have 
attempted to march an army into Canada, for the purpose of 
seizing these fugitives, would have cost rather more than 
they were worth. There was, however, a territory on our 
southern frontier, belonging to a power less able than Great 
Britain to punish aggressions on her sovereignty, and hence 
it is that we are called to consider 

The invasion of Florida, and destruction of fugitive 
slaves by the forces of the federal government. 
On the loth of March, 1816, Mr. Crawford, Secretary of 
War, addressed a letter to General Jackson, informing him 
that there was a fort in Florida, occupied by between 250 
and 300 blacks, and that they and the hostile Creek Indians 
were guilty of secret practices to inveigle negroes from the 
frontiers of Georgia, and directing him to call the attention 
of the Commandant at Pensacola to the subject. The Sec- 
retary added, that should the Commandant decline interfer- 
ing, and should it be determined that the destruction of the 
negro fort does not require the sanction of Congress, means 
will be promptly taken for its reduction. 

Gen. Jackson, however, had, before the receipt of this de- 
spatch, "assumed the responsibility" of sending his orders 
respecting this very fort to Gen. Gaines. " If the fort har- 
bors the negroes of our citizens, or of friendly Indians Jiving 
within' our territory, or holds out inducements to the slaves 
of our citizens to desert from their owner's service, it must 
he destroyed. — Notify the Governor of Pensacola of your ad- 
vance into his territory, and for the express 2>urposc of dest joy- 
ing these lawless banditti." The letter concludes with direc- 
tions to "restore the stolen negroes to their rightful owners." 
(Letter of 8th April, 1816.) 

Owing to some cause not explained, Gen. Gaines did not 
fulfil his instructions; and a gun-boat was sent up the Ap- 
palachicola river by order of Commodore Patterson, and on 
the :27th July attacked the fort by firing red-hot sin it at it. 
A shot entered the magazine which exploded. The result 
is thus stated in the official report: " Three hundred negroes, 
men, women, and children, and about 20 Indians, were in the 
fort; of these, 270 were killed, and the greater part of the 
rest mortally wounded." 

Commodore Patterson, in his letter to the Secretary of 
the Navy observes : " The service rendered by the destruc- 

* State papers. 2 Sess. 20th Cong. Vol. 1. 



FUGITIVES PAID FOR. 23 

tion of this fort, and the band of negroes who held it and the 
country in its vicinity, is of great and manifest importance 
to the United States, and particularly those States bordering 
on the Creek nation, as it had become a general rendezvous 
for ru nan-ay slaves and disaffected Indians — an asylum where 
they found arms and ammunition to protect themselves against 
their owners and the government. This hold being destroy- 
ed, they have no longer a place to fly to, and will not be so 
liable to abscond. The force of the negroes was daily in- 
creasing, and they had commenced several plantations on the 
banks of the Appalachicola."* 

Various plantations have also been commenced \n Canada 
by fugitive slaves, but being under the protection of Great 
Britain, and not of Spain, the Federal Government has wisely 
abstained from deny forcible attempt to destroy them. 

It is now time to advert to one of the most extraordinary 
exploits of American diplomacy, viz : 

Compensation for fugitive slaves, obtained by the 
Federal Government. 

The presence of British armed vessels in our southern 
waters, during the last war, afforded an opportunity to many 
of the slaves to escape from bondage. In 1S14, and while 
the war was raging in all its fury, commissioners were ap- 
pointed to treat of peace, and instructions were given to 
them as to the stipulations to be inserted in the treaty. These 
instructions contain the followingremarkable passage : " The 
negroes taken from the southern States should be returned 
to their owners, or paid for at their full value. If these 
slaves were considered as non-combatants, they ought to be 
restored : if as property, they ought to be paid for." More- 
over, this stipulation is expressly included "in the conditions 
on which you are to insist, in the proposed negotiations." — 
Letter of instructions from Mr. Monroe, Secretary of State, 
2Stk January, 1814. f 

Thus we see that not even the calamities of war, could di- 
vert the attention of the Federal Government from the pe- 
culiar interests of the slaveholders. The commissioners were 
faithful to the charge thus given to them ; and in the treaty 
concluded at Ghent, adroitly provided for the restoration of 
slarcs; and in such obscure terms as ultimately secured a 
far more extensive concession than the British negotiators 
had any intention of making. 

* State papers. 2 Sess. 15th Con"'. No. 65. t American State papers* 
Vol. IX. p. 364. 



21 NEGOTIATION FOP* PAYMENT 

The 1st Article is as follows: "All territory, places, arid 
possessions whatever, taken from either party, by the other 
during the war, or which may be taken after the signino- 
of this treaty, shall be restored without delay ; and without 
causing any destruction or carrying away of the artillery or 
other public property originally captured in said forts or pla- 
ces, and which shall remain upon the exchange of the ratifi- 
cations of this treaty, or any slaves or other private property." 

The treaty was ratified at Washington on the 17th Feb- 
ruary: and six days after, three commissioners appointed by 
the Government appeared in the Chesapeake, authorized to 
demand and receive the slaves on board the British squadron 
still in our waters. 

Captain John Clarelle happened to be at the moment in 
command of the British forced, and he positively refused to 
give up a single fugitive; contending that the stipulation in 
the treaty related only to slaves "originally captured in forts 
or places," and remaining in such forts or places at the ex- 
change of the ratifications, and had no reference to the slaves 
who had voluntarily sought protection on board British vessels. 

A few days after, Admiral Cockburn arrived, and a sim- 
ilar demand was made upon him. He also refused to sur- 
render any fugitives, as such were not intended in the treatv, 
but gave up 80 slaves which were found on Cumberland Isl- 
and at the time that place was captured, and who had not 
been removed previous to the exchange of ratifications ; this 
being a case directly within the true meaning and intention 
of the treaty. The Secretary of State then applied to tbe 
British Charge d'Affaires at Washington, requesting him to 
direct the Naval Commanders in the Chesapeake to give up 
the fugitives on board their vessels ; but Mr. Baker declined 
interfering, taking the same view of the article as the Admi- 
ral had done. In the meantime the squadron had sailed for 
Bermuda. The Government, tracking the scent of a fugitive 
with blood-hound keenness, forthwith despatched an agent 
to Bermuda in pursuit, to demand the negroes of the Gov- 
ernor. The worthy Englishman, nettled at a requisition so 
derogatory to the honor of his country, replied, " he would 
rather Bermuda, with every man, woman, and child in it, 
were sunk under the sea, than surrender one slave that had 
sought protection under the flag of England." 

The Agent, (Thomas Spalding) nothing daunted, now as- 
sumed the diplomatist, and addressed a long argumentative 
dispatch to Admiral Griffith, commanding on the Bermuda 
Station, demanding the fugitives and promising to furnish 



OP FUGITIVE SLAVES. 25 

him with a particular list of the slaves claimed, which he ex- 
pected to receive in a few days from the United States. The 
Admiral very cavalierly assured Mr. Spalding, that it was 
quite unnecessary for him to wait at Bermuda for die expect- 
ed document, since there was, neither at Bermuda, nor any 
other British island or settlement, any authority " competent 
to deliver up persons who during the late wars, had placed 
themselves under the protection of the British Hag."* 

From British Governors and Admirals, our Government 
now turned to the British Cabinet, and found that there also 
it was held a point of honor to keep faith, even with runaway 
slaves. Lord Castlereagh declared that the Government 
never would have assented to a treaty requiring the surren- 
der of persons who had taken refuge under the British 
Standard. Again was the demand made, and again was it 
iiunequivocally rejected. But the administration refused to 
yield, and insisted on a reference of the question to the de- 
cision of a friendly power, and named the Emperor of Rus- 
sia as umpire. After tedious negotiation, this point was car- 
ried ; and in ISIS, a convention was concluded at London, 
submitting the true construction of the treaty to the Empe- 
ror, who decided in favor of the slaveholders. It now be- 
came necessary to determine how the number of slaves, 
and their value, should be ascertained. Another negotiation 
ensued, which resulted in a second convention, by which it 
was agreed that each party should appoint a certain number 
of Commissioners, who should form a Board to sit at Wash- 
ington, to receive and liquidate the claims of the masters. 
But difficulties soon arose. The American Commissioners 
insisted on interest, which the others refused to allow. Ne- 
gotiations again commenced, till at last the British Cabinet, 
wearied with the pertinacity of the American Government, 
and sick of the controversy, entered into a third convention, 
(13th Nov. 1S36,) by which the enormous sum of one mil- 
lion TWO HUNDRED AND FOUR THOUSAND DOLLARS Was paid 

and received in full of all demands. 

Thus after a persevering negotiation, conducted for twelve 
years, at Washington, in the Chesapeake Bay, at Bermuda, 
at London, and at Petersburgh, did our Government succeed 
in obtaining most ample compensation for the fugitives. 
Commissioners were then appointed to distribute this sum ; 
and after fixing an average value on each slave proved to 
have been carried away, it was found that a surjilus stili re- 
mained ; and this surplus was divided among the masters ! 



State papers— 14th Cong. 2d Sess.— Senate documents, No. 32. 



26 DEMAND OF PAYMENT 

Having now seen the success that attended the pursuit of 
fugitive slaves, let us next witness the 

Efforts of the Federal Govermext to recover ship- 
wrecked SLAVES. 

Considering the extent of the American slave trade, it is 
not surprising that our slavers are occasionally driven out of 
their course; and are sometimes wrecked upon the danger- 
ous oeefe abounding in the neighboring Archipelago. 

On the 3d Jan. 1831, the brig Comet, a regular slaver 
from the District of Columbia, on her usual voyage from 
Alexandria to New-Orleans, with a cargo of 164 slaves, was 
lost off the Island of Abaco. The slaves were saved, and 
carried into New-Providence, where they were set at liberty 
by the authorities of the Island. A portion of the cargo, 
(146 head) was insured at New-Orleans for $71,330. « 

On the 4th Feb. 1833, the brig Encomium, from Charles- 
ton to New-Orleans with 4-3 slaves, was also wrecked near 
Abaco, and the slaves carried into New-Providence, where, 
like their predecessors, they were declared to be free. 

In Feb. 1835, the Enterprise, another regular slaver from 
the National Domain, on her voyage to Charleston, with 78 
slaves, was driven into Bermuda in distress. The passen- 
gers, instead of being thrown into prison as Bermudians 
would have been in Charleston under similar circumstances, 
were hospitably treated, and permitted to go at large. These 
successive and unexpected transmutations of slaves into free- 
men, roused the ready zeal of the Federal Government. — 
Directly on the loss of the Comet, instructions were sent 
from Washington to our Minister, to demand of the British 
Government the value of the cargo. In 1832, another des- 
patch was forwarded on the subject. The instructions were 
a^ain renewed in 1833 ; the Secretary of State remarking, 
this case " must be brought to a conclusion — the doctrine that 
Would justify the liberation of our slaves, is too dangerous to 
a large section of our country to be tolerated." 

In 1834, fresh instructions were sent, and a demand order- 
ed to be made for the value of the slaves in the Encomium. 

In 1835, similar instructions were sent relative to the En- 
terprise. 

In 1836, the instructions were renewed ; the Secretary 
observing to Mr. Stevenson, " In the present state of our 
dijdomatic relations with the Government of His Britanic 
Majesty, the must immediately pressing of the matters with 
which the United States' Legation at London is now charged, 



FOR SHIPWRECKED SLAVES. 27 

is the claim of certain American citizens against Cheat Brit- 
ain for a number of slaves, the cargoes of three vessels 
wrecked in British Islands in the Atlantic." 

Thus for six successive years did the Cabinet at Washing- 
ton keep sending despatches to their agents in England, urg- 
ing them to obtain payment from Great Britain for these 
caigocs of human flesh. Nor were those agents remiss or 
reluctant in fulfilling their instructions. Numerous were 
the letters addressed to the British Secretary, claiming either 
the restoration of the slaves, or their equivalent in money. 

From a long and labored communication from Mr. Ste- 
venson to Lord Palmerston, we extract the following morccau. 

" The undersigned feels assured that it will only be neces- 
sary to refer Lord Palmerston to the provisions of the Con- 
stitution of the United States, and the laws of many of the 
States, to satisfy him of the existence of slavery, and that 
slaves are there regarded and protected as property : that 
by these raws, there is in fact no distinction in principle be- 
ticnii property in persons and property in things ; and that the 
Government have more than once, in the most solemn manner, 
determined that daves killed, in the service of the United States, 
even in a state of war, were to be regarded as property, and not 
as persons; and the Gorcrnmcnt held responsible for their value." 

No answer having been vouchsafed to this letter, and the 
argument being exhausted, Mr. Stevenson tried the virtue of 
a diplomatic hint that the United States would go to war 
for their slaves ; expressing his hope in a letter to Lord 
Palmerston, that the British Government would " not longer 
consent to postpone the decision of a subject which had been 
for so many years under its consideration ; and the effect of 
which can be none other than to throw not only additional 
impediments in the way of an adjustment, and increase 
those feelings of dissatisfaction and irritation which have 
already been excited ; but by possibility tend to disturb and 
weaken the kind and amicable relations which now so happily 
subsist between the two countries, and on the preservation of 
which, so essential! // depend the interests and happiness of both." 
—(Letter of 31st' December, 1S36.) 

How this hint was received we are not informed ; but it 
is certainly not creditable to the British Government, that 
instead of a prompt and frank refusal to deliver into cruel 
and perpetual bondage, innocent men who had providentially 
been thrown under its protection, or to estimate their value 
in pounds, shillings, and pence, it had, at our last accounts, 
avoided giving a decided answer to the demands of the Wash- 



28 AMERICAN SLAVE TRADE. 

ington Cabinet, under pretence of taking the opinion of the 
law officers of the crown. 

The negotiation was made public in consequence of a call 
by the Senate on the President (7th Feb. 1S37) for a copy 
of the " Correspondence with the Government of Great 
Britain in relation to the outrage committed on our flag, and 
the rights of our citizens, by the authorities of Bermuda and 
New-Providence, in seizing the slaves on board the brig 
' Encomium' and ■ Enterprise,' engaged in the coasting trade, 
but which were forced by shipwreck and stress of weather 
into the ports of those Islands." 

The language of this resolution, indicates the influence 
exerted by slavery over tire Federal Government. Should 
a murderer escape from England and land on our shores, 
we refuse to surrender him to the justice of his country ;* 
but when the West Indian authorities refuse to deliver two 
hundred and eighty-seven innocent men, women, and child- 
ren, thrown by the tempest under their protection, into 
hopeless, interminable slavery, the Senate solemnly pro- 
nounce the refusal to be an outrage on our flag, and the 
rights of our citizens. Moreover, the liberation of these 
persons is spoken of as ^seizure of them, and the slavers carry- 
ing human cargoes to market, are most audaciously declared 
to have been engaged in the coasting trade ! The real trade 
in which these vessels were engaged, was 

The American Slave Trade under the protection and 
regulation of the federal government. 

We shall first exhibit the character and extent of this 
trade, and then show that it is in fact carried on under the 
protection and regulation of the Federal Government. 

The competition of free with slave labor in the bread 
Stuffs and seme other productions of Maryland, Virginia, and 
North Carolina, have greatly reduced the value of slaves as 
laborers in those States ; and hence the disposition mani- 
fested there some years since, to get rid of this unprofitable 
portion of their population. But the rapid extension of the 
cotton and sugar cultivation in the extreme South, together 
with the settlement of the new States of Alabama, Missis- 

NOTK BY J. C. J.\CK!=OS. 

* Hy a provision in the Ashburton Treaty, made with England during the 
time Daniel Webster was Secretary of State, this Gpvernrnem and that of 
England bave mutually stipulated to deliver up persons charged with offences 

and escaping into the jurisdiction of either, provided such acts are considered 
by both as criminal offences. 



AMERICAN SLAVE TRADE. 29 

sippi, Missouri, and Arkansas, occasioned a prodigious de- 
mand for slaves ; and the agriculturists of Virginia and the 
neighboring States discovered that their most lucrative occu- 
pation was that of raising live stock for the southern and 
western markets. In Georgia and South Carolina, it has 
also been found more advantageous to export their supernu- 
meraries to Mobile, New-Orleans, or Natchez, than to em- 
ploy them on their already well-stocked plantations. Hence 
lias grown up an almost incredible transfer of slaves from 
the North to the South ; and recently a new market has 
been opened in Texas, giving an additional stimulus to the 
trade. It is impossible to ascertain the exact amount of this 
trade, as the Secretary of the Treasury in his annual report 
on the commercial statistics of the United States, has never 
included any statements respecting this branch of the " coast- 
ing trade." But indeed, the returns from the several Cus- 
tom Houses of» the size and value of the human cargoes 
cleared for the southern ports, if given, would afford a very 
inadequate idea of the extent of the traffic, since it is carried 
on by land as well as by sea. Whole coffles of chained slaves 
are driven long and painful journeys in the interior of the 
Republic, much in the same manner as in the wilds of Afri- 
ca. The Rev. Mr. Dickey, in a published letter thus de- 
scribes a cofHe he met on the road in Kentucky : — " I dis- 
covered about forty black men all chained together in the 
following manner : each of them was handcuffed, and they 
were arranged in rank and file ; a chain perhaps forty feet 
long was stretched between two ranks, to which short chains 
were joined, which connected with the handcuffs. Behind 
them were, I suppose, thirty women, in double rank, the cou- 
jrfes tied hand to handy 

J. K. Paulding, the present Secretary of the Navy, gives 
the following picture of a scene he witnessed in Virginia: 

" The sun w r as shining out very hot, and in turning an 
angle of the road we encountered the following group : first, 
a little cart drawn by one horse, in which five or six half 
naked black children were tumbled like pigs together. The 
cart had no covering, and they seemed to have been actually 
broiled to sleep. Behind the cart marched three black wo- 
men, with head, neck and breasts, uncovered, and without 
shoes or stockings ; next came three men, bareheaded, half 
naked, and chained together with an ox chain ! Last of all 
came a white man — a white man, Frank ! — on horseback, 
carrying pistols in his belt, and who, as we passed him, had 
the impudence to look us in the face without blushing. I 



30 AMERICAN SLAVE TRADE. 

should like to have seen him hunted by blood-hounds. At a 
house where we stopped a little further on, we learned that 
he had bought these miserable beings in Maryland, and was 
marching them in this manner to some of the more southern 
States. Shame on the State of Maryland ! I say — and 
shame on the State of Virginia ! and every State through 
which this wretched cavalcade was permitted to pass. Da 
they expect that such exhibitions will not dishonor them in 
the eyes of strangers, however they may be reconciled to 
them by education and habit V? 

" Letters from (he South, written during an excursion in the Summer of 1S1C." 
New-York, 1-17. Vol. 1. Letter XI. p. 117. 

It may be. thought by some that the elevation to a seat in the Cabinet, of a gentle- 
man who expresses himself with so much warmth and fearlessness against one of the 
" peculiar institutions of the South," militates against our idea that the influence of 
the Federal Government is exerted in behalf of slavery. Singular as it may appear, 
the appointment of Mr. Paulding is nevertheless strongly corroborative of the opinion 
we have advanced ; and the explanation is at once easy and amusing. The " Letters 
from the South" were reprinted in 1835, and form the fifth and, sixth volumes of aD 
edition of "Paulding's Works." The letter from which we have quoted consists of 
fourteen pages, devoted to the subject of slavery. On turning to the corresponding 
letter in the recent edition we find it shrunk to three pages, containing no allusion to 
the internal trade, nor any thing else that could offend the most sennit i\e Southerner. 
In the nineteenth letter as printed in 1817, there is not a word about slavery. In the 
same letter as published in 1835, we meet with the following most wonderful predic- 
tion : a prediction that has lately been cited in the newspapers as a proof of the saga- 
city and foresight of the Secretary of the Navy: — 

" The second cause of disunion will be found in the slave population of the South, 
whenever the misguided, or willfully malignant zeal of the advocates of emancipation, 
shall institute as it one day doubtl> 88 will, a crusade against the constitutional rig 
the slave owners, by sending among them fanatical agents and fanatical 
1 ited to render the .-laves disaffected, and tho situation of the master and his family 
dangerous ; when appeals shall be made under the sanction of religion to the .>assions 
of these ignorant and excited blacks, calculated and intended tdrOuse their worst and 
most dangerous passions, and to pjace the very lives of their masters, their v, i. 
their children, in the deepest peril; when societies are formed in the sister States for the 
avowed purpose of virtually destroying the value of this principal item in the property of 

iiern planter : when it becomes a question mooted in the Legislatures of the S 
or of the General Government, whether the rights of the master oVer his slave shall 
be any longer recognized or maintained, and when it is at last evident that nothing 
will preserve them but secession, then will certain of the Stars of our beautiful con- 
stellation ' start madly from their spheres and jostle the others in their wild career.'" 

In the title of the new edition, the date of the "excursion" is modestly omitted, but 
the reader is not informed that the spirit of prophecy descended upon the w i iter, not 
while journeying at the South, but while witnessing in New-York the operations of 
the predicted soc,i< ties, and after the city had been convulsed by the abolition riots. 

In 1836, Mr. Paulding published his "Slavery in the United States." In this work 
both the Old and New Testament are made to irhe their sanction to ,-la\erv. Great 
Britain, in abolishing shivery in the Wesl Indies, is charged with having "committed 
robbery under cover of humanity." — (p. 41.) "A community of free blacks rising 
am, mil' t he nuns of States, lords of the soil. Smoking Willi I he habitations and blood of 

their exterminated masters and families," would we are assured beonlj 
wishes" of t!n abolitionists, — (p. 56.) The advocates of immediate emancipation re- 
commend ii :- asserted, "indiscriminate marriages between the whites and b] 
(p. 61.) and well educated respectable females amongst then arc apparently anxious 
" to become the mothers of mulattoes." — (p..62.) Slavery .we are told " 
gradually dives.ti I of all its harsh features, and is now only the bugbear of the mi urj- 
nation:" — (p.26.)and Mr. Paulding affirms— '"In a residence of -••■ tral years within 
the District, and a pretty extensive i ourse of travel in sorhfi of the southern States, 
(the excursion in tin' summer of 1816, we suppose,) we never saw or heard of any 
such instances of cruelty. — We saw no chains, (!) and heard no ■stripes. " — (p. I 
We trust our reader- are now fully convinced of this gentleman's qualifications for 
ffice of Secretary of the Navy, and of .Mr. Van Buren'.s consistency in appoi 



AMERICAN SLAVE TRADE. 31 

As we arc about to enter into particulars respecting the 
American slave trade, it may not l>e uninteresting to inquire 
who are its victims 1 They are native horn Americans. But 
of what color and descent 1 This will no doubt be deemed 
by many a very unnessary question ; and no little indigna- 
tion will probably be excited when we answer that large 
numbers of these victims arc white men and women, and the 
children of America)) citizens. 

People at the north are disposed to be incredulous, when 
they hear of white slaves at the South ; and yet a little re- 
flection would convince them not only that there must be 
such slaves under the present system, but that in process of 
time, a large proportion of the slaves will be as white as their 
masters. Were there no other sources of information re- 
specting the complexions of the southern slaves, the news- 
paper notices of runaways would most abundantly 'confirm 
our assertion. Of these notices, we give the following as 
samples. 

" ^100 Reward. — The above reward will be paid for the 
apprehension of my man William. He is a very bright mu- 
latto — straight yellowish hair. I have no doubt he will change 
his name, and try to pass himself for a WHITE MAN, 
which he may be able to do, unless to a close observer. 

August 9. T. S. PlCHARD." 

• ^100 Reward. — Ranaway from James Hyhart, Paris,. 
Kentucky, on the 29th June last, the mulatto boy Norton, 
about 15 years, a very bright mulatto, and would be taken 
for a WHITE BOY, if not closely examined. His hair is 
black and straight, &c. — New Orleans True American, 11th 
. i -/, lS36.' r 

■ LOO Reward — Will be given for the apprehension of 
my negro (!) Edmund Kcnney. He has straight hair, and 
complexion so nearly WHITE, that it is believed a stranger 
would suppose there teas ??o African blood in him. He was 
with my boy Dick a short time since in Norfolk, and offered 
lii w for sale, and was apprehended, but escaped under pre- 
tence of being a WHITE MAN. Anderson Bowles. 

Richmond Whig 6th January, 1S36." 

l * $50 Reward — Will be oiven for the apprehension and 
delivery to me of the following slaves: Samuel, and Judy his 
wife, with their four children, belonging to the estate of 
Sacker Dubberly, deceased. 

I will give $10 for the apprehension of William Dubberly, 
a slave belonging to the estate. W r illiam is about 19 years 



32 WHITE SLAVES. 

old, QUITE WHITE, and would not readily be mistaken 
for a slave. JoH * T - Laxe. 

Newborn Spectator, 13*fc March, 1537." 

"8100 Rcicard. — Ranaway from the subscriber, a bright, 
mulatto man slave, named Sam. Light sandy hair, blue eyes, 
ruddy complexion— -is so WHITE as very easily to pass for 
a free WHITE MAN. Edwin Peck. 

Mohilc, April 22, 1837." 

"$50 Reicard. — I will give the above reward of fifty dol- 
lars for the apprehension and securing in any jail, so that I 
get him again, or delivering to me in Dandridge, E. Tenn. 
my mulatto boy named Preston, about twenty years old. It 
is supposed he will try to pass as a free WHITE MAN. 

Oct. 12, 1838. John Roper." 

" Ranaway from the subscriber, working on the plantation 
of Col. H. Tinker, a bright mulatto boy named Alfred. Alfred 
is about 18 years of age, pretty well grown, has Hue eyes, 
light flaxen hair, skin disposed to freckle. He will try to pass 
as FREE BORN. S. G. Stewart. 

Qrecn County, Alabama." 

Mr. Paxton, a Virginia writer, tells us in his work on 
slavery, that " the best blood in Virginia flows in the veins 
of the slaves." 

Dr. Torrey, in his work on domestic slavery in the United 
States, p. 14, says : " While at a public house in Frederick- 
town, there came into the bar-room on Sunday, a decently 
dressed white man, of quite a light complexion, in company 
with one who was totally black. After they went away, the 
landlord observed that the white man was a slave. I asked 
him with some surprise how that could be possible ? To 
which he replied, that he was a descendant, by female ances- 
try, of an African slave. He also stated that not far from 
Fredericktown, there was a slave estate on which there were 
several white females, as of fair and elegant appearance as 
white ladies in general, held in legal bondage as slaves ! ! 

A Missouri paper, reporting the trial of a slave boy, re- 
marks : " All the physiological marks of distinction which 
characterize the African descent, had disappeared. His skin 
was fair, his hair soft, straight, fine and white, his eyes blue, 
but rather disposed to the hazel-nut color, nose prominent, 
the lips small and well formed, forehead high and prominent," 

In the summer of 1S35, a slaveholder from Maryland ar- 
rested as his fugitive, a young woman in Philadelphia. A 
trial ensued, when it was most conclusively proved that the 



WHITE SLAVES. 33 

alleged slave, Mary Gilmore, was the child of poor Iris7i 
parents, and had not a drop of African blood in her veins. 

A paper printed at Louisville, Ky., the " Emporium," re- 
lates a circumstance that occurred in that city, in the follow- 
ing terms. " A laudable indignation was universally mani- 
fested among our citizens on Saturday last, by the exposure 
of a woman and two children for sale at public auction, at 
the front of our principal tavern. The woman and children 
were as white as any of our citizens ; indeed, we scarcely 
ever saw a child with a fairer or clearer complexion than 
the younger one." — Nilcs's Register, June, 1821. 

Mr. Niles tells us in his register, that Mr. Calhoun, the 
late Vice President, had related to him the case of a man 
" placed on the stand for sale as a slave, whose appearance 
in all respects gave him a better claim to the character of a 
WHITE MAN than most persons so acknowledged could 
show."— Register, 25th Oct. 1884. 

We will now attempt to give the reader some idea of the 
extent of the trade — a trade in which human beings of every 
shade, from the purest white to the deepest black, are made 
articles of merchandise, and treated with cruelty little if any 
less than that which has made the African slave trade the 
execration of the civilized world. 

" Dealing in slaves," says the Baltimore Register, " has 
become a large business ; establishments are made in several 
places in Maryland and Virginia, at which they are sold like 
cattle ; these places of deposit are strongly built, and well 
supplied with iron thumb-screws and gags, and ornamented 
with cowskins and other whips, oftentimes bloody." 

The advertisements of the Baltimore traders show that 
the Maryland Colonization Society, in their endeavors to 
suppress the slave trade, may find a field for their labors less 
distant than the coast of Africa. We annex some samples. 

" Austin Woodfolk of Baltimore, wishes to inform the 
slaveholders of Maryland and Virginia, that their friend still 
lives to give cash and the highest price for negroes," «S:c. 

" General Slave Agency Office. — Gentlemen planters from 
the South and others who wish to purchase negroes, would 
do well to o;ive me a call. Lewis Scott." 

" Cash/or two hundred Negroes. — The highest cash prices 
will be paid for negroes of both sexes, by application to me 
or my agent at Booth's Garden. Hope H. Slater./' 

" For New-Orleans. — A coppered, copper-fastened packet- 
brig Isaac Franklin, will sail on the 1st Feb. for Baltimore. 
c 



34 AMERICAN SLAVE TRADE. 

Those Imping servants to ship will do -well by making early 
application to James 1% Purvis/' &c. 

Human flesh is now the great staple of Virginia. ' In the 
Legislature of this State in 1832, Thomas Jefferson .Ran- 
dolph declared that Virginia had been converted into " one 
r grand menagerie where men are reared fur the market like oxen 
for t!ic shambles." This same gentleman thus compared the 
foreign with the domestic traffic. " The trader (African) 
receives the slaves, a stranger in aspect, language, and man- 
ner, from the merchant who brought him from the interior. 
But here, sir, individuals whom the master has known from 
infancy— whom he has seen sporting in the innocent gam- 
bols of childhood — who have been accustomed to look to 
him for protection, he tears from the mother's arms, and sells 
'into a strange country, among a strange people, subject to cruel 
taskmasters. In my opinion it is much worse." 

Mr. C. F. Mercer asserted in the Virginia Convention of 
1S29, " The tables of the natural growth of the slave popu- 
lation demonstrate, when compared with the increase of its 
numbers in the Commonwealth for twenty years past, that 
an annual revenue of not less than a million and a half of 
dollars is derived from the exportation of a part of this popu- 
lation." — Debates p. 99. 

Professor E. A. Andrews gives a conversation he had with 
a trader on board a steam-boat on the Potomac, in 1835. 
"'In selling his slaves, N assures me he never sepa- 
rates families ; but that in purchasing them he is often com- 
pelled to do so, for that his business is to purchase, and he 
must take such as are in the market. Do you often buy the 
wife without the husband I Yes, very often ; and frequent- 
ly, too, they sell me the mother, while they keep the children. 
I have often known them take away tie infant from the moth- 
er's breast, and keep it, while they sold her. Children from 
one to eighteen months old, are now worth about one hun- 
dred dollars.'"'* 

The town of Petersburg in Virginia, seems to enjoy a 
huge share of this commerce, judging from the advertise- 
ments of its merchants. 

" Cash for Negroes. — The subscribers are particularly anx- 
ious to make a shipment of negroes shortly. All persons who 
have slaves to part with, will do well to call as soon as pos- 
sible. Overly & Saunders." 

"The subscriber being desirous of making another skip- 

* Slavery and the domestic slave trade ia the United States, p. 417. 



VIRGINIA. 35 

ment by the brig Adelaide to New-Orleans, on the first of 
March, will give a good market price for fifty negroes from 
ten to thirty years old. Henry Davis." 

" The subscriber wishes to purchase one hundred slaves-, of 
both sexes, from the age of ten to thirty, for which he is dis- 
posed to give much higher prices than have heretofore been 
given. He will call on those living in the adjacent counties 
to see any property. Ansley Davis." 

J hit of all the Virginia merchants, Mr. Collier, of Rich- 
mond, seems to be the most enterprising. \Ve give extracts 
from his 

" Notice. — This is to inform my former acquaintances, and 
the public generally, that I yet continue in the SLAVE 
TRADE, at Richmond, Virginia, and will at all times buy 
and give a fair market price for young negroes. Persons in 
this State, Maryland, or North Carolina, wishing to sell lots 
of negroes, are particularly requested to forward their wishes 
to me at this place. Persons wishing to purchase lots of 
negroes, are requested to give me a call, as I keep constantly 
on hand at this place, a great many for sale ; and have at 
this time the use of one hundred young negroes, consisting 
of boys, young men, and girls. I will sell at all times at a 
small advance on cost, to suit purchasers. I have comfortable 
rooms with a jail attached, for the reception of the neoroes ; 
and persons coming to this place to sell slaves, can be accom- 
modated, and every attention necessary will be given to have 
them well attended to; and when it may be desired, the re- 
ception of the company of gentlemen dealing in stare*, will 
conveniently and attentively be received. My situation is 
very healthy and suitable for the business. 

Lewis A. Collier." 

Joseph Wood of Hamburg, South Carolina, a " gentle- 
man dealing in slaves," advertises that he " has on hand a 
likely parcel of Virginia negroes and receives new supplies 
every fifteen days." 

And what are the pecuniary results of this commerce ? 
Mr. Mercer, as we have seen, estimated the annual revenue 
to Virginia from the export of human flesh, at one million 
and a half of dollars. But this was in 1S29, before the trade 
had reached its present palmy state. " The Virginia Times," 
in 1836, in an article on the importance of increasing the 
banking capital of the Commonwealth, estimates the num- 
ber of slaves exported for sale the "last twelve months," at 
forty thousand ; each slave averaging six hundred dollars, 
and thus yielding a capital of twenty -four millions, of 



36 AMERICAN SLAVE TRADE. 

which the Editor thinks, at least thirteen millions might be 
contributed for banking purposes .* 

Let us now visit the " Metropolis of the Nation," the very 
heart of this mighty commerce in the bodies and souls of 
men. The District of Columbia, from its relative situation 
to the breeding States, forms a convenient depot for the ne- 
groes, previous to their exportation; and the non-interfer- 
ence of Congress, gives the traders " under the exclusive 
jurisdiction" of the Federal Government, as unlimited power 
over the treatment and stowage of their human cargoes, as 
their brethren enjoy, on the coast of Guinea. 

Hence large establishments have grown up upon the na- 
tional domain, provided with prisons for the safe-keeping of 
the negroes, till a full cargo is procured ; and should at any 
time the factory prisons be insufficient, the public ones, erect- 
ed by Congress, are at the service of the dealers, and the 
United States Marshal becomes the agent of the slave trader ! 

It must be admitted, that the following pictures of the 
scenes witnessed in the District of Columbia, are drawn by 
impartial hands. So long ago as 1S02, the grand jury of 
Alexandria complaining of the trade, remarked : " These 
dealers in the persons of our fellow-men, collect within this 
district from various parts, numbers of these victims of slave- 
ry, and lodge them in some place of confinement until they 
have completed their numbers. They are then turned out 
into our streets, and exposed to view loaded with chains, as 
though they had committed some heinous offence against our 
laws. We consider it as a grievance that citizens from a 
distant part of the United States, should be permitted to 
come within the District, and pursue a traffic fraught with 
so much misery to a class of beings entitled to our protec- 
tion, by the laws of justice and humanity; and that the in- 
terposition of civil authority cannot be had to prevent parents 
being wrested from their offspring, and children from their 
parents, without respect to the ties of nature. We consider 
these grievances demanding legislative redress :" — that is, 
redress by Congress. 

In 1810, Judge Morel! of the Circuit Court of the United 
States, in his charge to the grahd jury of Washington, ob- 
served, speaking of the slave trade : " The frequency with 
which the streets of the city had been crowded with manacled 
captives, sometimes on the Sabbath, could not fail to shock 
the feelings of all humane persons." 

T Nilfes's Register. 



DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. 37 

The same year, John Randolph moved in the House of 
Representatives for a committee "to inquire into the exist- 
ence of an inhuman and illegal traffic of slaves carried on, 
in, and through the District of Columbia, and report whether 
any or what measures are necessary for putting a stop to the 
same." The motion was adopted ; had it been made twen- 
ty years later, it would under the rules of the House, have 
been laid on the table, " and no further action had thereon." 

The Alexandria Gazette of June 22d, 1S27, thus describes 
the scenes sanctioned by our professedly republican and 
Christian Legislature : " Scarcely a week passes without 
some of these wretched creatures being driven through our 
streets. After having been confined, and sometimes man- 
acled in a loathsome prison, they are turned out in public 
view to take their departure for the South. The children 
and some of the women are generally crowded into a cart or 
wagon, while others follow on foot, not unfrequently hand- 
cuffed and chained together. Here you may behold fathers 
and brothers leaving behind them the dearest objects of af- 
fection, and moving slowly along in the mute agony of de- 
spair — there the young mother sobbing over the infant whose 
innocent smiles seem but to increase her misery. From 
some you will hear the burst of bitter lamentation, while 
from others, the loud hysteric laugh breaks forth, denoting 
still deeper agony." 

In 1828, a petition for the suppression of this trade was 
presented to Congress, signed by more than one thousand in- 
habitants of this District. 

In 1829, the Grand Jury of Washington made a commu- 
nication to Congress, in which they say, " Provision ought to 
be made to prevent purchasers for the purpose of removal 
and transportation, from making the cities of the District, 
depots for the imprisonment of the slaves they collect. The 
manner in which they are brought and confined in these pla- 
ces, and carried through our streets, is necessarily such as to 
excite the most painful feelings. It is believed that the whole 
community wouic> be gratified by the interference of Congress 
for the suppression of these receptacles, and the exclusion 
of this disgusting traffic from the District." 

In 1830, the " Washington Spectator" thus gave vent to 
its indignation : 

" The slave trade in the Capital. — Let it be known to the 
citizens of America, that at the very time when the proces- 
sion which contained the President of the United States and 
his Cabinet was marching in triumph to the Capitol, another 



38 AMERICAN SLAVE TRADE. 

kind of procession was marching another way : and that con- 
sisted of colored human beings, handcuffed in ])airs, and driven 
along by what had the appearance of a man on horseback ! 
A similar scene was repeated on Saturday last; a drove con- 
sisting of males and females, chained in couples, starting from 
Roly's tavern on foot for Alexandria, where with others they 
are to embark on board a slave ship in waiting to convey 
them to the South. Where is the O'Connell in this Repub- 
lic that will plead for the emancipation of the District of 
Columbia!" 

The advertisements of the dealers, indicate the extent of 
the traffic. The National Intelligencer' of the 28th March, 
1836, printed at Washington, contained the following ad- 
vertisements : 

" Cash for fire hundred Negroes, including both sexes, from 
ten to twenty-five years of age. Persons having likely ser- 
vants to dispose of, will find it their interest to give us a call, 
as we will give higher prices in cash, than any other pur- 
chaser who is now or may hereafter come into the market. 
Franklin 85; Amfield, Alexandria." 

" Cash for three hundred Negroes. — The highest cash price 
will be given by the subscriber, fc>r negroes of both sexes, 
from the ages of twelve to twenty-eight. 

"William H. Williams, Washington." 

" Cash for four hundred Negroes, including both sexes, from 
twelve to twenty-five years of age. 

James H. Birch, "Washington City." 

" Cash for Negroes. — We will at all times give the highest 
prices in cash for likely young negroes of both sexes, from 
ten to thirty years of acre. 

J. W. Neal & Co., Washington." 

Here we find three traders in the District, advertising in 
one day for twelve hundred negroes, and a fourth offering to 
buy an indefinite number. 

In a later number of the Intelligencer, we find the follow- 
ing: 

" Cash for Negroes. — I will give the highest price for like- 
ly negroes from ten to twenty-live years of age. 

George Kjephart.' 

" Cash for Nmror*. — I will give cash and liberal prices for 
axy number of young and likely negroes, from eight to forty 
years of age. Persons having negroes to dispose of, will 
find it to their advantage to give me a call at my residence on 



AMERICAN SLAVE TRADE. 39 

the corner of Seventh-street and Maryland Avenue, and op- 
posite Mr. Williams' private jaiL 

William H. Richards." 

" Cash for Negroes. — The subscriber wishes to purchase a 
number of negroes for the Louisiana and Mississippi market. 
Himself or an agent at all times can be found at his jail, on 
Seventh-street. Wm. H. Williams." 

The unhappy beings purchased by these traders in human 
flesh, men and women, and children of eigki years old, are 
sent to the South, either over land in collies, or by sea, in 
crowded slavers. Fostered by Congress, these traders lose 
all sense of shame; and we have in the National Intelligen- 
cer, the following announcement of the regular departure of 
tl tree slavers, belonging to a single factory: 

"Alexandria and New-Orleans Padrets. Brig Tribune, 

Samuel C. Bush, master, will sail as above on the 1st Janu- 
ary — Brig Isaac Franklin, Wm. Smith, master, on the 15th 
January — Brig Zd/cas, Nath. Boush, master, on the 1st Feb- 
ruary. They will continue to leave this port on the 1st and 
loth of each month, throughout the shipping season. Ser- 
vants that are intended f o he shipped, will at any time be recei- 
ved for safe-keeping at tteenty-fiec cents a dap 

John Amfield, Alexandria." 

This infamous advertisement of the regular sailing of three 
slavers, and the offer of the use of the factory prison, appears 
in one of the principal journals of the United States. Its 
proprietor has several times been chosen printer to Congress, 
and there is no reason for believing that he has ever lost the 
vote of a northern member for this prostitution of his col- 
umns. 

But the climax of infamy is still untold. This trade in 
blood; this buying, imprisoning, and exporting of boys and 
girls eight years old; this tearing asunder of husbands and 
wives, parents and children, is all legalized in virtue of au- 
thority delegated by Congress!! The 219th page of the 
laws of the city of Washington, is polluted by the following 
enactment, bearing date 2Sth July, 1831 : 

u For a license to trade or traffic in slaves for profit, four 
hundred dollars." 

Such is the character and extent of the American slave 
trade, impudently and wickedly called by the Senate, " the 
coasting trade," — a trade protected and regulated by the 
very government which in the Treaty of Client, with won- 
derful assurance, declared that "the traffic in slaves is irre- 
concilable with the principles of justice and humanity." 



40 AMERICAN SLAVE TRADE. 

The government may be fairly said to protect the trade, 
when it refuses to exercise its constitutional power to sup- 
press it. The very fact that slave traders are licensed in the 
District, is a full and complete acknowledgement that there 
is authority competent to forbid their nefarious business. 
The continuance of the traffic under the immediate and " ex- 
clusive jurisdiction" of the National Government, stamps 
with disgrace every member of Congress who assents 'to it ; 
and more especially, and with peculiar infamy, those north- 
ern members who, for party purposes, vote that " Congress 
ought not in any way, to interfere with slavery in the District 
of Columbia." 

But we are constantly told by the apologists of slavery that 
the American slave trade is beyond the constitutional con- 
trol of the Federal Government; yet that government abol- 
ished the African slave trade, and no human being ever ques- 
tioned its right to do so ! Eut whence was that derived % 
Solely from the 8th Sec. of the 1st Art. of the Constitution, viz :• 

" Congress shall have power to regulate commerce with 
foreign nations, and among the several States." 

In virtue of this delegation of power, Congress has made 
it a capital crime to carry on commerce in African slaves. 
Now that this legislative prohibition of the traffic is consti- 
tutional, is proved by the highest possible authority, even the 
Constitution itself; for that instrument, after giving Con- 
gress power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, re- 
stricts it from abolishing the African slave trade before the 
expiration of twenty years * To regulate, we are told, does 
not include the power to destroy; yet it seems the power to 
regulate commerce with foreign nations does include the 
power to interdict an odious, cruel, and wicked branch of it. 
By what logic then will it be shown that the power to regu- 
late the commerce among the several States, does not include 
the power to interdict a traffic in men, women, and children? 
Is it more wicked, more base, more cruel, to traffic in Afri- 
can savages than in native bora Americans — in white men, 
and women and children — in the offspring of our own citi- 
zens, and not unfrequently, of very distinguished citizens'? 
Yet it is this abominable commerce that our government fos- 
ters and protocts. We have seen its watchful guardianship 

•The phraseology of this ro.-t i ict ion shows that it was intended to limit the power to 
regulate commerce as well f«mong the several State-." u With foreign nations. "The 
migration, or importation of Mich porsons as any of the existing States shall think 
proper to admit, shall not be. prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand 
eight hundred and eight."— (Art. I. Bee. 9.) If any State Phould think proper to admit 
slaves migrating from another State, it was not to he restrained from doing so till 
1803. If it should think proper to import slaves from a foreign country, it might do so 
notwithstanding the wishes of Congress, till the same period. 



DUPLICITY OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 41 

over this trade in its unceasing endeavors to obtain compen- 
sation from Great Britain for 287 slaves thrown by the winds 
and waves under her protection. Mr. Van Burcn, our Min- 
ister in England, in an official note on this subject, (Feb. 25, 
1832,) remarked:— 

" The Government of the United States respecting the 
actual and unavoidable condition of things at home, while it 
most sedulously and rigorously guards against the further in- 
troduction of slaves, protects at the same time by reasonable 
laws the rights of the owners of that species of property in 
the States where it exists, and permits its transfer coastwise 
from one of these States to another, under suitable restric- 
tions to prevent the fraudulent introduction of foreign slaves." 

By the act of Congress of 2d March, 1S07, masters of ves- 
sels under 40 tons burthen, are forbidden to transport coast- 
wise from one port to another in the United States any per- 
son of color to be sold or held as a slave, under the penalty 
of $800 for each slave so transported. 

By the same act, masters of vessels, over 40 tons burthen 
sailing coastwise from one port to another, and intending to 
transport persons of color to he sold or held as slaves t must first 
make out duplicate manifests, specifying the names, sex, age, 
and stature, of the persons transported, and the names and 
residence of their owner or shipper. These manifests are 
to be delivered to the collector of the port who is to retain 
one, and to return the other to the master with a "permit" 
endorsed on it, "authorizing him to proceed to the port of 
destination." If the master presumes to transport a slave 
without such permit, not only is the vessel forfeited, but the 
master is to pay a penalty of $1000 for each slave shipped. 
On the arrival of the vessel at the port of destination, the 
manifest, with the permit, is to be handed to the collector, 
who thereupon is to grant a "permit'''' for the landing of the 
slaves, and if any are landed without such permit, the master 
forfeits one thousand dollars. So it seems Congress may 
prohibit the slave trade in vessels viulcr forty tons; but ac- 
cording to northern politicians, it would be unconstitutional 
to prohibit it in vessels over forty tons; and according to the 
slaveholders, such a prohibition would cause the dissolution 
of the Union ! But alas ! the permission, regulation, and 
protection of this traific is in perfect keeping with 

The duplicity of the Federal Government ix regard 
to the suppression of the african slave trade. 

The great struggle for the abstract principles of human 
liberty, in which our fathers engaged with so much zeal, had, 



4.2 DUPLICITY OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 

at the close of the revolutionary war, excited a very general 
conviction of the injustice of slavery. When the convention 
appointed to form a Federal Constitution assembled, the 
northern and many of the southern delegates were disposed 
to give the new government such unqualified power over the 
commerce of the nation, as would enable it to abolish a traf- 
fic no less at variance with our republican professions than 
with the precepts of humanity and religion. A portion of 
the southern delegates however, insisted on a temporary re- 
striction of this power as the price of their adhesion to the 
Union ; and their threat of marring the beauty, symmetry, 
and strength of the fair fabric about to be erected by with- 
drawing from it the support of the States they represented, 
unfortunately induced the convention to yield to their wishes, 
and to insert in the Constitution a clause restraining - Con- 
gress from abolishing the African slave trade for twenty 
years. Mr. Madison has left us the following history of this 
iniquitous clause: "The southern States would not have 
entered into the union of America without the temporary 
permission of that trade. The gentlemen from South Caro- 
lina and Georgia, argued in this manner — 'We have now 
liberty to import this species of property, and much of the 
property now possessed has been purchased, or otherwise 
acquired in contemplation of improving it by the assistance 
of imported slaves. What would be the consequence of 
hindering us from it ? The slaves of Virginia would rise in 
value and we should be obliged to go to your markets.' " — 
Delates in Virginia Convention. 

A\ r e have here the solution of much contradictory action 
on the part of the slaveholders in regard to this trade. It 
seems to have been early discovered that its abolition would 
be advantageous to the slave-breeders, but not to the slave- 
buyers. Owing to climate, soil, and productions, slave labor 
is less profitable in Maryland and Virginia, than in the more 
southern States; hence, the greater demand for this labor in 
the latter States has, since the cessation of importation, 
caused a constant influx of slaves from the former. The 
breeders in Maryland mid Virginia have, for the most part, 
striven in good faith for T ho total suppression of the African 
trade; while those who originally refused to enter the Union 
unless permitted lor at Least twenty years, to import their 
slaves directly from Africa, have since evinced very little de- 
sire to secure to their neighbors the monopoly of the market. 

Whenever the opponents of Abolition find it convenient 
to refer to the action of the Federal Government on the sub- 



DUPLICITY OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 43 

ject of slavery, they laud and magnify its horror of the Afri- 
can slave trade, and exultingly point to the law of Congress, 
branding it with the penalties of piracy. And yet we are 
inclined to believe, that the conduct of our government in re- 
lation to this very subject, is one of the foulest stains attach- 
ed to our national administration. Has the trade been sup- 
pressed] Has the Federal Government in good faith en- 
deavored to suppress it] These are important questions, 
and we shall endeavor to solve them by an appeal to facts 
and official documents. 

In a debate in Congress in 1S19, Mr. Middleton of South 
Carolina, stated, that in his opinion, 13,000 Africans were 
annually smuggled into the United States. Mr. Wright of 
Virginia, estimated the number at 15,000 ! The same year, 
Judge Story of the Supreme Court of the United States, in 
a charge to a Grand Jury, thus expresses himself: — " We 
have but too many proofs from unquestionable sources, that 
it (the African trade) is: still carried on with all the implaca- 
ble ferocity and insatiable rapacity of former times. Avarice 
has grown more subtle in its evasions, and watches and sei- 
zes its prey with an appetite quickened rather than suppres- 
sed by its guilty vigils. American citizens are steeped to then- 
very mouths, (I can scarcely use too bold a figure,) in this 
stream of iniquity." 

On the 22d Jan. 1811, the Secretary of the Navy wrote, 
to the commanding naval officer at Charleston. "I hear, not 
without oreat concern, that the law prohibiting the importa- 
tion of slaves, has been violated infrequent instances, near 
St. Mary's, since the gun-boats have been withdrawn from 
that station." 

On the 14th March, 1S14, the collector of Darien, Geor- 
gia, thus wrote to the Secretary of the Treasury: — " I am in 
possession of undoubted information, that African and West 
India aegrbes are almost daily illicitly introduced into Geor- 
gia, for settlement, or passing through it to the territories of 
the United States, for similar purposes. These facts are no- 
torious, and it is not unusual to see such negroes in the street a 
of St. Mary, and such too, recently captured by our vessels 
of war, and ordered for Savannah, were illegally bartered 
by liundreds in that city, for this bartering (or bonding, as i' 
is called, but in reality selling,) actually took place before any 
decision has passed by the Court respecting them. I can- 
not but again express to you, sir, that these irregularities, 
and mocking of the laws by men who understand them, are 
such that it requires the immediate interposition of Congress 



44 IMPORTATION OF AFRICANS. 

to effect the suppression of this traffic; for as things are, 
should a faithful officer of the Government apprehend such 
negroes, to avoid the penalties imposed by the laws, ihepro- 
prietors disclaim them, and some agent of the Executive de- 
mands a delivery of the same to him, who may employ them as 
he pleases, or effect a sale by way of bond for the restoration of 
the negroes when legally called on so to do, which bond is un- 
derstood to be forfeited, as the amount of the bond is so much 
less than the value of the property . After much fatigue, peril, 
and expense, eighty-eight Africans are seized and brought to 
the Surveyor to Darien; they are demanded by the Govern- 
or's agent. Notwithstanding the knowledge which his Ex- 
cellency had that these very Africans were some weeks with- 
in six miles of his Excellency's residence, there was no ef- 
fort, no stir made by him, his agents, or subordinate State 
officers, to carry the laws into execution ; but no sooner than 
it was understood that a seizure had been effected by an 
officer of the United States, a demand is made for them ; 
and it is not difficult to perceive, that the very aggressors 
may, by a forfeiture of the mock bond, be again placed in 
possession of the smuggled property." 

In 1S17, General David B. Mitchell, Governor of Georgia, 
resigned the Executive chair, and accepted the appointment 
under the Federal Government, of Indian Agent at the Creek 
Agency. He was afterwards charged with being concerned 
in the winter of 1S17 and ISIS, in the illegal importation of 
Africans. The documents in support of the charge, and 
those also which he offered to disprove it, Avere placed by 
the President in the hands of Mr. Wirt, the Attorney Gen- 
eral of the United States, who on the 21st January, 1831, 
made a report on the same. From this report, it appears 
that no less than 91 Africans were smuggled into Georgia, 
and carried to Mitchell's residence. Mr. Wirt concludes 
his report with the expression of his conviction, "that Gen. 
Mitchell is guilty of having prostituted his power as Agent 
for Indian Affairs at the Creek Agency, to the purpose of 
aiding and assisting in a conscious breach of the Act of Con- 
gress of 1S07, in prohibition of the slave trade, and this from 
mercenary motives."* 

On the 2:u\ May, 1S17, the Collector at Savannah wrote 
to the Secretary of the Treasury: — "I have just received 
information from a source on which I can implicitly rely, 
that it has already become the practice to introduce into the 
State of Georgia across St. Mary's River, from Amelia Isl- 
and, E. Florida, Africans who have been carried into the 

♦Senate papers, 1st Sess. 17th Cong. No. 93. 



IMPORTATION OF AFRICANS. 45 

port of Ferdinanda. It is further understood, that the evil 
will not be confined altogether to Africans, but will be ex- 
tended to the worst class of West India .slaves." 

Captain Morris of the Navy, informed the Secretary of 
the Navy, (18th June, 1817,) — " Slaves are smuggled in 
through the numerous inlets to the westward, where the peo- 
2)le are but too much disposed to render every possible assistance. 
Several hundred slaves are now at Galveston, and persons 
have gone from New-Orleans to purchase them." 

On the 17th April, 1818, the Collector at New-Orleans, 
wrote to the Secretary of the Treasury : — " No efforts of 
the officers of the Customs alone, can be effectual in prevent- 
ing the introduction of Africans from the westward : to put 
a stop to that traffic, a naval force suitable to those waters is 
indispensable; and vessels captured with slaves ought not to 
be brought into this port, but to some other in the United States, 
for adjudication" We may learn the cause of this signifi- 
cant hint, from a communication made the 9th July, in the 
same year, to the Secretary, by the Collector at Nova-Ibera. 
" Last summer I got out State warrants, and had negroes 
seized to the number of eighteen, which were part of them 
stolen out of the custody of the coroner ; the balance were con- 
demned by the District Judge, and the informers received 
their part of the nett proceeds from the State Treasurer. 
Five negroes that were seized about the same time, were 
tried at Opelousa in May last, by the same Judge. He de- 
cided that some Spaniards that were supposed to have set up 
a sham claim, stating that the negroes had been stolen from, 
them on the high seas, (! !) should have the negroes, and that 
the 2 ) crso??s icho seized them should pay half the costs, and the 
State of Louisiana the other. This decision had such an ef- 
fect as to render it almost impossible for me to obtain any 
assistance in that part of the country." 

The Secretary of the Treasury, in a letter to the Speaker 
of the House of Representatives, 20th January, 1S19, re- 
marked : — " It is understood that proceedings have been in- 
stituted under the State authorities which have terminated in 
the sale of persons of color illegally imported into the States 
of Georgia and Louisiana, during the years 1817 and 1818. 
There is no authentic copy of the acts of the Legislatures of 
these States upon this subject in this department, but it is 
understood that in both States, Africans and other persons of 
color, illegally imported, are directed to be sold for the 

BENEFIT OF THE STATE."* 

* In 1835, the New-York Journal of Commerce asserted that vessels had been re- 
cently fitted out in that port for the African slave trade. 



46 IMPORTATION OF AFRICANS. 

We have now, we think, proved from high authority, that 
notwithstanding the legal prohibition of the slave trade, the 
people, the courts, and the Executive authority in the plant- 
ing States, have afforded facilities for the importation of Af- 
ricans. It now becomes important to inquire how far the 
Federal Government has enforced the penalties imposed by 
the Act forbidding the trade. 

On the 7th January, 1819, Joseph Nourse, Register of the 
Treasury, in an official document submitted to { . cer- 

tified that there were no records in the Treasury department 
of any forfeitures under the Act of 1807, abolishing the slave- 
trade ! So that notwithstanding the thirteen or fifteen thou- 
sand slaves, said by southern members of Congress to be 
annually smuggled into the United States— notwithstanding 
American citizens were declared by a Judge of the Supreme 
Court to be " steeped to their very mouths in this stream of 
iniquity," not one single forfeiture had in eleven years reached 
the Treasury of the United States ! Mr. Nourse, however, 
states, that it was understood that there had been recently tico 
forfeitures, one in South Carolina, and the other in Alabama. 
Respecting the first, we have no information ; of the latter, 
we are able to present the following extraordinary history. 

The Collector at Mobile, writing Nov. 15, 18 IS, to the 
Secretary of the Treasury, remarks : " Should West Florida 
be given up to the Spanish authorities, both the American 
and Spanish vessels it is to be apprehended will be employed 
in the importation of slaves with an ultimate destination to 
this country ; and even in its present situation, the greatest 
facilities are afforded for obtaining slaves from Havana and 
elsewhere through West Florida. Tltrec vessels, it is true, 
were taken in the attempt last summer, but this was owing 
rather to accident than any well-timed arrangement to prevent 
the trade." 

These three vessels brought in 107 slaves. By what mis- 
take they were captured we are not informed, but another 

Tlio Boston Express ot' 17th De< ember, 1838, thus gives the substance ot the state- 
ments made by Mr. Elliott Cresson, of the Pennsylvania Coloui.-.atiou Society, in ;i 
public address delivered a few days before in Boston: 

"Out of 111 -lave ships which arrive at Cuba every year, five-sixths are owned and 
lined oat from ports in the United States ; and the enormous profits accruing from 
their voyages remitted to this country. One. house in New -York received lately for 
its -hare alone the sum of $250,000. Baltimore is largely interested in this accursed 
traffic as Well a- New-York — and even Boston, with all her religion and morality, does 
not disdain to increase her wealth by a participation in so damnal-le a business. A 
gentleman of the highest respectability lately informed Mr. Cresson that a sailor in 
this city told him that lie had received several hundred dollars of bush money to make 
him keep silent, and when he mentioned the names of his employers the gentleman, 
.-ays he was actually afraid to repeat them, so high do they stand in society. A cap- 
tain in the merchant service from New-York, was lately offered his own terms by two. 
different houses provided he would undertake a slave voyage*" 

Of the truth of these statements we know nothing. 



LMl'lNITV OF TIIADI.IIS. 47 

letter from the Collector shows us how the " accident" was 
remedied. " The vessels and cargoes and slaves have been 
delivered on bands; the former to the owners, and the 
slaves to three other persons. The Grand Jury found true 
bills against the owners of the vessels, masters and super- 
cargo — all of whom hare been discharged — why or where- 
fore, I cannot say, except that it could not be for want of 
proof against them." From this letter it is most probable 
that the forfeiture of which Mr. Nourse had heard, if any in 
fact occurred, was the collusive forfeiture of the Bonus.* 

We most freely acknowledge that so far as the statute 
book is to be received as evidence, there can be no question 
of the sincerity and zeal with which the Federal Government 
has labored to suppress the African slave trade : but laws do 
not execute themselves, and we shall now appeal to the stat- 
ute book, and to the minutes of Congress, to convict the 
Government of gross hypocrisy and duplicity. 

It is difficult to understand why men who are engaged in 
breeding slaves for the market, or why men who are employ- 
ed in buying and working slaves, should have any moral or 
relio-ious* scruples about the African trade ; and when we find 
political leaders professing to be ready to sacrifice the Union 
to secure the perpetuity of the American trade, we may sure- 
ly be excused for doubting the sincerity of their denuncia- 
tions against the foreign traffic. 

In the year 1817, a new and sudden zeal was excited in 
Congress for the abolition of the trade, and this zeal as we 
shall" see, was the offspring of the efforts of Virginia to colo- 
nize the free blacks. The legislature of that State had for 
years been anxious to get rid, not of the slaves, but of the 
free negroes. On the 1st January, 1817, the Colonization 
Society, the result of Virginia policy, was organized at 
Washington, and immediately presented a memorial to Con- 
gress praying for national countenance. The committee to 
whom this memorial was referred, reported (11th Feb.) two 
resolutions: — 1st, Calling on the President to enter into 
necrotiations with foreign powers for the " entire and imme- 
diate abolition of the traffic in slaves ;" and 2nd, asking him 
to obtain the consent of Great Britain to our colonizing fiee 
people of color at Sierra Leone. Thus early was the cause 
of Colonization connected with the agitation in Congress 
about the slave trade ; a connexion from which, as we shall 
presently see, the Society reaped a very large pecuniary ad- 

* The documents we have quoted on this subject, are to be fouud iu Reports of 
Committees.— 1st £ess. 21st Cong. No. 34S. 



48 COLONIZATION AND 

vantage. The resolutions were not acted on, and the next 
session, Mr. Mercer, regarded in Virginia as the father of 
the Society, succeeded in getting a vote of the House (Dec. 
30th, 1817,) instructing the committee on the memorial from 
the Society, to report on the expediency of rendering the 
laws against the slave trade more effectual. Of this commit- 
tee Mi\ Mercer was himself the chairman ; and he recom- 
mended in his report, that the President should take meas- 
ures for procuring suitable territory in Africa for colonizing 
free iieople of color with their own consent ; and that armed 
vessels should occasionally be sent to Africa for the purpose 
of interrupting the trade. The suggestions of the commit- 
tee were not adopted, but the ensuing session, (3d March, 
IS 19,) a new act against the slave trade was passed, which 
gave " a local habitation" to the present colony of Monrovia ; 
and was equivalent to a liberal and national grant to the So- 
ciety. By this act, the President was authorized to restore 
to their country, such Africans as might be captured on board 
of slavers, or illegally introduced into the United States ; and 
he was to appoint agents on the coast to receive them. Mr. 
Monroe, then President of the United States, was a zealous 
colonizationist, and was afterwards placed at the head of the 
Auxiliary Society. Let us see what use he made of the 
powers entrusted to him by the act of 1S19. Many years 
after, an inquiry was instituted in Congress as to the expend- 
itures under this law, and the Secretary of the Navy (1830,) 
reported that " 252 persons* of this description (recaptured 
Africans) have been removed to the settlement provided by 
the Colonization Society on the coast of Africa ; and that 
there had been expended therefor, the sum of two hundred 
and sixty-four thousand seven hundred and ten dollars. * * * 
The practice has been to furnish these persons with provis- 
ions for a period of time after being landed in Africa, vary- 
ing from six months to one year ; to provide them with 
Ik. uses, arms, and ammunition; to pay for the erection of 
fortifications* for the building of vessels for their use, and in 
short to render all the aid required for the founding and sup- 
port of a colonial establishment*" 

* We liavn not been able to ascertain from what Bources these Africans were obtain- 
ed, but that they were not aU of them trophies of the seal of oflr cruisers in the cause of 
humanity, appears from the following extracts ftdm official documents. "There are 
now in the charge of the Marsha] of Georgia, 248 Africans taken out of a South Amer- 
ican privateer, the ' General Ramirez,' tchose creii mutinied, and brought the vessel 
into st. Mary's, Georgia."— Letter of See'y of Nayy, 7th lVl.'v, 1821 "A decision 
of the Supreme Court in the case of the 'General Ramirez,' placed under the control 
of the Government from 125 to 130 Africans, who were brought into Georgia, and ar- 
rangements are making to send than to the Agency."'— ^Liberia.)— Report of Sec'y of 
Navy, Dec. 2d, 1825. 



THE SLAVE TRADE. 49 

A report from Amos Kendall, Fourth Auditor of the 
Treasury, discloses more particularly the maimer in which 
the " Act in addition to the Acts prohibiting the slave trade" 
was made subservient to the purposes of the Colonization 
Society. 

" In May, 1822, the Secretary of the Navy directed that 
fen liberated Africans should be delivered to Mr. J. Ashmun, 
for transportation to Africa. The Secretary authorized him 
to take out at the expense of the Government, 15,000 hard 
brick, 5,000 feet of assorted timber, 30 barrels of ship bread, 
eight of tar, four of pitch, four of rosin, and two of turpen- 
tine. ******** 

" In the simple grant of power to an agent to receive recap- 
tured negroes, it requires broad construction to find a grant 
of authority to colonize them, to build houses for them, to 
furnish them with farming utensils, to pay instructers to 
teach them, to purchase ships for their commerce, to build 
forts for their protection, to supply them with arms and mu- 
nitions, and to employ the army and navy in their defence."* 

It cannot be denied that the friends of Colonization had 
great encouragement to proceed in their warfare against the 
slave trade. Accordingly Mr. Mercer, as the chairman of 
the committee to whom a memorial from the Society had 
been referred, reported (May 9th, 1S20,) a Bill incorporating 
the Society, and another making the slave trade piracy ; and 
likewise two resolutions, — the first requesting the President 
to negotiate with foreign powers, " on the means of effecting 
an entire and immediate abolition of the slave trade;" and 
another requesting him to make such use of the public armed 
vessels as may aid the efforts of the Colonization Society* 
The first resolution was adopted, and the consideration of 
the other postponed. A few days after, (May 15th,) the Act 
making the African slave trade piratical, was passed. But 
laws do not execute themselves : and if any slave trader has 
suffered death in the United States as a pirate, we confess 
our ignorance of the fact.! 

* Senate Document*. 2 Sess. 2 Cong-. 

tin 1S20, a slave vessel, the Science, fitted out at New-York, and commanded by 
Adolphe Lacoste of Charleston, South Carolina, was captured on the coast of Africa, 
by the United States Ship, Cyane. ;ui<l Lacoste sent home for trial. The trial took 
place in the Circuit Court of the United States, before Judge Story. The evidence 
was full and unequivocal; Lacoste was convicted, and sentenced to five years' impris- 
onment, and to the payment of a fine of s3.(HiO. Had the crime been committed a few 
mouths later, the penalty would halve been death, under the new law, declaring the 
trade piracy. Lacoste received a full pardon from the President, and the reader may 

thence judge, whether had he been convicted as n pirate, his life would have 1 n 

much in danger. The reasous assigned for the pardon, were youth, previous good 
character, and au aged mother. — NUcs's Register, April 90, 189%. 
D 



50 FOREIGN NEGOTIATIONS 

Tl certainly required some little assurance in the House-' 
01 Representatives, thus to order a negotiation with foreign 
powers, for the suppression of the trade, when the Federal 
Government had itself been so remiss in its efforts, that both 
Houses of the British Parliament had, the year before, (July 
1819,) addressed the Prince Regent, praying him to renew 
"his beneficent endeavors, 'more especially with the Gov- 
ernments of France and the United States of America, for the 
effectual attainment of an object we all profess to have in 
view :" and a negotiation had already been actually com- 
menced with our Government, proposing to concede " to 
each other's ships of war, a qualified right of search, with a 
power of detaining the vessels of either State, with slaves 
actually on board:"* and a positive refusal to this proposal 
had already been returned. There is no evidence that our 
Government ever took a single measure in consequence of 
this resolution ; and under all the circumstances of the case, 
it is not uncharitable to believe, that it was intended to save 
appearances. 

We must now beg the reader's attention to a new act, in 
this farce of suppressing the slave trade. 

In 1S14, our government concluded a war with Great 
Britain, and in the treaty of peace, gave its assent to the fol- 
lowing article. " Whereas the traffic in slaves is irreconci- 
lable with the principles of humanity and justice ; and where- 
as His Majesty and the United States are desirous of con- 
tinuing their efforts to promote its entire abolition, it is here- 
by agreed, that both the contracting parties shall use their 
best endeavors to accomplish so desirable an object." 

On the 29th January, 1823, Mr. Stratford Canning, the 
British Minister at Washington^ addressed a letter to the 
Secretary of State, reminding bim of this pledge, and calling 
on the American Government cither to assent to the plan 
proposed by Great Britain, or to suggest some other efficient 
one in its place. After the reception of this letter, and be- 
fore the return of an answer, the following resolution was 
passed (2Sth F( 1..'; by t he House of Representatives, viz. 

"Resolved, that the President of the United States be re- 
quested to enter upon and prosecute from time to time, such 
negotiations with the several maritime powers of* Europe and 
America, as he may deem expedient, for the effectual aboli- 
tion of the African slave trade, and its ultimate denunciation 
as piracy, under, the laics of nations, by the consent of the ctth^ 
Hi zed world." 

* Letter from Lord Castlereach to Mr. Rush, June 20, 1S1C. 



ABOUT THE SLAVE TRADE. 51 

The British Minister was then informed, in answer to his 
letter, that the plan proposed by the United States was a 
mutual stipulation to annex the penalty of piracy to the of- 
fence of participating in the trade, by the citizens and sub- 
jects of the two parties. Mr. Canning replied, that " Great 
Britain desires no other, than that any of her subjects who 
so far defy the laws, and dishonor the character of their 
country as to engage in a trade of blood, proscribed not more 
by the act of the Legislature, than by the national feeling, 
should be detected and brought to justice even by foreign 
Itands, and from under the protection of her Hag." He nev- 
ertheless urged a limited concession of the right of search, 
as the only practical cure of the evil; and he communicated 
the fact, that so late as January, 1822, it was slated officially 
by the Governor of Sierra Leone, " that the fine rivers of 
Nunez and Pongas were entirely under the control of rene- 
gade European, and American slave traders." He then pro- 
posed that a mutual right of search should be conceded, to 
be confined to a fixed number of cruisers on each side ; to 
be restricted to certain parts of the ocean ; and that to pre- 
vent abuses, these cruisers should act under regulations pre- 
pared by mutual consent ; and moreover, that this conces- 
sion should be made only for a short time, that if found in- 
convenient in practice, it might be discontinued.* 

But the Republic stood on its dignity, and would not con- 
descend to yield a concession which Great Britain, France, 
Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, and 
Sardinia, have thought it no degradation to make in the cause 
of humanity. 

But still the American Government was very anxious that 
every man of every nation, who engaged in the traffic of 
slaves on the coast of Africa, (not in the District of Colum- 
bia,) should be hung by the neck till he was dead ; and forth- 
with, in obedience to the resolution of 28th February, des- 
patches were forwarded to the Cabinets of France, Spain, 
Portugal, Russia, the Netherlands, Buenos Ayrcs, and Co- 
lumbia, announcing the desire of the United States to de- 
clare the trade piracy, by the common consent of nations. 

It is generally understood, that a pirate is an enemy to the 
human race, and may be put to death by any government in 
whose hands he may chance to fall. If this was not the pur- 
port of the proposition of the House of Representatives, that 
the trade should be denounced " as piracy under the laws 

* Letter froai Mr. Stratford Canning to the Secretary of State, 18th April, 1S23. 



52 FOREIGN NEGOTIATIONS. 

of nations, by the consent of the civilized world" we may 
well ask, what did it mean % 

On the 24th June, 1823, instructions were forwarded to 
our Minister in England, authorizing him to conclude a 
treaty with Great Britain on the subject of the slave trade, 
on certain conditions. " The draft of a convention," says 
the Secretary of State, " is herewith enclosed, which, IF the 
British Government should agree to treat upon this subject, 
on the basis of a legislative prohibition of the slave trade by 
both parties under the penalties of piracy, you are authori- 
zed to propose and conclude." 

Now it should be remembered, that at this time the trade 
was not piratical by the British laws, and the English Minis- 
try could not make it so by treaty. We therefore proposed 
a condition with which possibly, they might not have it in 
their power to comply. The ministry, however, when made 
acquainted with the condition, felt confident of the acquies- 
cence of Parliament. " The British Plenipotentiaries," says 
Mr. Rush, in his letter to the Secretary of State, " gave their 
unhesitating consent to the principle of denouncing the traf- 
fic as piracy, provided we could arrive at a common mind on 
all the other parts of the plan proposed." 

The treaty, nearly verbatim, with a draft sent from Wash- 
ington, was signed at London on the 13th March, 1S21 ; and 
a few days afterwards, according to a previous understand- 
ing, and in fulfilment of the condition exacted by us, Parlia- 
ment passed an Act, declaring that all British subjects found 
guilty of slave trading, " shall suffer death without benefit of 
clergy, and loss of lands, goods, and chattels, as tirates, 
felons, and robbers upon the seas, ought to suffer." 

This treaty provided in substance, that the cruisers of 
cither party on the coast of Africa, America, and the West 
Indies, might seize slaves under the flag of the other, and 
send them home to the country to which they belonged, where 
they should be proceeded against as pirates. So that in fact 
the whole concession made by us to Great Britain, amounted 
to no more than permitting her to arrest our pirates, and to 
deliver them to our courts for trial ; and in return, she grant- 
ed us precisely the same right with respect to her pirates. 

The treaty was submitted of course to the Senate for rati- 
fication, which, under the circumstances of the case, one 
would think, must have followed as a matter of course. The 
Senate, however, thought otherwise. The treaty was laid 
before them on the 30th of April; but as they delayed to 
act upon it, the British Minister at Washington became un- 



TREATY FOR THE SUPPRESSION 53 

easy, and on the lGth of May, addressed a letter to the Sec- 
retary of State, complaining of the postponement of the 
ratification, especially as the project of the convention had 
originated with the United States ; and as Great Britain "had 
not hesitated an instant to comply with the preliminary act 
desired by the President," the Legislative prohibition of the 
slave trade under the penalties of piracy. 

The President naturally feeling his own good faith com- 
promitted by the hesitation of the Senate, now sent them a 
confidential message, urging the ratification of the treaty. 
He remarked that the rejection of the treaty would subject 
the Executive, Congress, and the Nation, " to the charge of 
insincerity respecting the great result of the final suppression 
of the slave trade. To invite all nations with the statute of 
piracy in our hands, to adopt its principles as the law of na- 
tions, and yet to deny to all the common rights of search for 
the pirate, whom it would be impossible to detect without 
entering and searching the vessel, would expose us not sim- 
ply to the charge of inconsistency." 

The Senate after long debates, finally ratified the treaty, 
in a mutilated form. They struck out the word, " America," 
in the clause authorizing the seizures of slavers on "the coasts 
of Africa, America, and the West Indies." They also ex- 
punged the articles applying the provisions of the treaty, to 
vessels chartered, as well as owned by the citizens or sub- 
jects of either party ; and to the citizens or subjects of either 
party carrying on the trade under foreign flags ; and they 
added an article authorizing either party to terminate the 
treaty at any time, on giving six months notice.' 

It will have been observed from the documents we have 
quoted, that the slaves imported into the United States, have 
been chiefly introduced through the Spanish possessions on 
our southern frontiers ; slavers direct from Africa, rarely 
having the hardihood to enter our ports, and discharge their 
cargoes ; while small vessels from the West Indies, have 
occasionally found their way into the southern waters. Of 
course the treaty as altered by the Senate, would afford but 
little interruption to this mode of stocking the plantations of 
Louisiana and the neighboring States. 

As chartered vessels were excepted, our traders would only 
have to hire slavers instead of owning them, to be exempted 
from the hazard of being arrested and sent home for trial, 
by British oificers ; or if even on board their own vessels, by 
running up a foreign flag, they would escape the penalties 
of piracy. 



54 OF THE AFRICAN SLAVE TRADE. 

The British Cabinet refused to agree to the treaty thus 
despoiled of all its efficiency ; but with wonderful simplicity, 
they proposed to restrict the right of search on the coast of 
America, to the coast of the southern States. This proposi- 
tion was of course, promptly rejected by our Minister in 
England. 

The British Government vainly cherishing the hope, that 
the United States might still consent to some combined ef- 
fort to destroy a trade they professed to abhor, offered 
through their Minister at Washington, to consent to a treaty, 
word for word the same as the one the Senate had ratified, 
with the single exception of restoring the word, " America." 
To this, Mr. Clay, then Secretary of State, replied, that 
" from the views entertained by the Senate, it would seem 
unnecessary and inexpedient any longer to continue the ne- 
gotiation respecting the slave convention, with any hope that 
it can assume a form satisfactory to both parties. That a 
similar convention had been formed with Columbia, on the 
10th December, 1824, excepting that the coast of America 
was excepted from its operation ; and yet, notwithstanding this 
conciliatory feature, the Senate had by a large majority re- 
fused to ratify it"* 

Negotiations have since been renewed on this subject ; 
and France has united with Great Britain, in urging the 
Cabinet at Washington to co-operate with them in putting 
an end to the African slave trade. The correspondence has 
not been made public, but we learn from the Edinburgh Re- 
view, for July, 1836, that the final answer of the American 
Government is, that " under no condition, in no form, and 
with no restriction, will the United States enter into any con- 
vention, or treaty, or combined efforts of any sort or kind with 
other nati&fis, for the suppression of this trade" 

To our readers we leave the task of making their own 
comments on this history of duplicity and hypocrisy; and 
proceed to other details. 

On the 2nd November, 1825, the Columbian Minister at 
Washington, in the name of his Government, invited the 
United States to send delegates to a Congress of the South 
American Republics, to be held at Panama. In enumera- 
ting the topics to be discussed in the proposed Congress, he 
remarked ; " The consideration of means to be adopted for 
the entire abolition of the African slave trade, is a subject 
sacred to humanity, and interesting to the policy of the Amer- 
ican States. To effect it, their energetic, general, and uni- 

* The documents quoted on this subject, may be found in State Papers, 1st Sess, 10 
Cong. Vol. 1. And in Reports of Committees, 1st Sess. 21 Cong. Vol. 3, No. 34& 



INTERFERENCE FOR CUBA. 55 

form co-operation is desirable. At the proposition of the Uni- 
ted States, Columbia made a convention with them on this 
subject, which has not been ratified by the Government of the 
United States. Would that America, which does not think 
politic what is unjust, contribute in union, and with common 
consent, to the good of Africa !" 

This document was submitted to the Senate, and on the 
16th January, 1S26, a committee of the Senate made a re- 
port in relation to it, in which they observe : " The United 
States have not certainly the right, and ought never to feel 
the inclination to dictate to others who may differ with them 
on this subject," (the slave trade.) " nor do the committee 
see the expediency of insulting other States by ascending the 
■moral chair, and proclaiming from thence mere abstract prin- 
ciples, of the rectitude of which each nation enjoys the per- 
fect right of deciding for itself." 

The remarks made on this occasion by Mr. "White, a Sen- 
ator from Tennessee, are worthy of observation. " In these 
new States (the S. American Republics,) some of them have 
put it down in their fundamental law, ' that whoever owns a 
slave shall cease to be a citizen.' Is it then fit that the Uni- 
ted States should disturb the quiet of the southern and west- 
ern States upon any subject connected with slavery ? I think 
not. Can it be the desire of any prominent politician in the 
United States, to divide us into parties upon the subject of 
slavery ] I hope not. Let us then cease to talk about slave- 
ry in this House ; let us cease to negotiate upon any subject 
connected with it." 

We have seen most abundantly, that slaveholders have no 
objection to talk about slavery in Congress, or to negotiate 
about it with foreign nations, when the object is to guard their 
beloved institution from danger. It is only on the abomina- 
tions of the system, and the means of removing it, that every 
tongue must be mute, and the Federal Government passive. 
Turning from the consideration of our professions, as con- 
trasted with our conduct in regard to the suppression of the 
African slave trade, let us next take a view of 

The efforts of the Federal Government to prevent 
the abolition of slavery in the island of clisa. 

At the time of the Congress of Panama, Spain was still 
at war with her late colonies, and of course they were au- 
thorized by every principle of national law, as well as of self- 
defence, to carry their arms into the dominions of their ene- 
my. Cuba was at a short distance, devoted to the royal 



56 INTERFERENCE FOR CUBA. 

cause, and affording a depot for the naval force ever ready 
to prey upon the commerce of the republics. Under these 
circumstances, Mexico and Columbia meditated the invasion 
and conquest of that island. But these republics, on achiev- 
ing their own freedom, had given freedom to their slaves ; 
and it was probable that they would manifest equal regard 
for human rights, were they to become masters of Cuba. 
These remarks will explain the following extract from the 
instructions given to the ministers appointed to represent the 
United States at the Congress of Panama. 

" It is required by the frank and friendly relations which 
we most anxiously desire ever to cherish with the new repub- 
lics that you should, without reserve, explicitly state that the 
United States have too much at stake, in the fortunes of Cu- 
ba, to allow them^to see with indifference a war of invasion 
prosecuted in a desolating manner, or to see employed, in the 
purposes of such a war, one race of the inhabitants combat- 
tin^ against another, upon principles and with motives that 
must inevitably lead, if not to the extermination of one party 
or the other, to the most shocking excesses. The humanity 
of the United States in respect to the weaker, and which in 
such a terrible struggle would probably be the suffering por- 
tion, and the duty to defend themselves against the contagion 
of such near and dangerous examples, would constrain them, 
even at the hazard of losing the friendship of Mexico and Co- 
lumbia, to employ all the means necessary to their security."* 

The obvious meaning of all this, in plain English, divested 
of its diplomatic circumlocution, is simply that the Federal 
Government, in order to protect the slavery of the South 
from the shock it might receive from emancipation in Cuba, 
would, if neecessary, go to war with our sister republics to 
prevent the invasion of that island. 

But so long as Spain refused to acknowledge the indepen- 
dence of her revolted colonies, the war would be continued, 
Cuba would be exposed to invasion, and the slave States to 
the " contagion" of emancipation. Hence the cabinet at 
"Washington became exceedingly anxious to act the part of 
peace-makers. Our Minister at St. Petersburg was instruct- 
ed " to endeavor to engage the Russian Government to 
contribute its best exertions towards terminating the exist- 
ing contest between Spain and her colonies. From the vi- 
cinity of Cuba to the United States, its valuable commerce 
and the nature of its 'population, their government cannot be 

* Letters of Instruction* from Mr. Clay, Secretory of State, to Messrs. Anderson anil 
Sargeunt, 8tU May, 1826. 



INTERFERENCE FOR CUBA. 57 

indifferent to any political change to which that island may 
be destined."* 

Spain also was implored, through the American Minister 
at Madrid, to be reconciled to her undutiful children. " It 
is not for the new republics" said Mr. Clay, in his letter (27th 
April, 1S2-3,) to Mr. Everett, " that the President wishes you 
to urge upon Spain the expediency of concluding the war. 
If the war should continue between Spain and the new re- 
publics, and those islands (Cuba and Porto Pico) should be- 
come the object and theatre of it, their fortunes have such a 
connexion with the people of the United States, that they 
could not be indifferent spectators ; and the possible contin- 
gencies of a protracted war might bring upon the Government 
of the United States duties and obligations, the performance of 
which, however painful it should be, they might not be at liberty 
to decline" t 

•The proposed invasion was abandoned ; but the fears of 
our Government were not allayed. The war continued, and 
some contingency arising from it, might give liberty to the 
tens of thousands in Cuba pining in bonds. A new attempt 
was made to induce Spain to remove the danger by conclu- 
ding the war. On the 22d October, 1829, Mr. Van Buren 
then Secretary of State, instructed Mr. Van Ness, our Min- 
ister in Spain, to press upon that court a reconciliation with 
the South American republics. " Considerations," he re- 
marked, " connected with a certain class of our population, make 
it the interest of the southern section of the Union, that no at- 
tempt should be made in that island to throw off the yoke 
of Spanish dependence ; the first effect of which would be 
the sudden cmanri Ration of a numerous slave pojntlation, ichose 
result could not but be very scnsiU 'y felt upon the adjacent shores 
of the United States." 

Fortunate it is for the cause of humanity, that the great- 
est republic upon earth had not the power to prevent " the 
sudden emancipation of a numerous slave population" in the 
British West Indies, on the 1st of August, 1S6S ; "-whose 
result," blessed be God, is and will be " very sensibly felt on 
the adjacent shores of the United States." 

The subject of the Panama mission was debated at great 
length in both Houses of Congress, and frequent allusions 
were made by the speakers to Cuba. Let us hearken to the 
sentiments expressed by some of our republican legislators. 

* Letters from Mr. Clay to Mr. Middleton, 10th May, 1825. 
t Senate Documents, 1st Sess. 19 Cong. vol. 3. 



S3 AVOWALS IN CONGRESS. 

Mr. Randolph of Virginia : " Cuba possesses an immense 
negro population. In case those States (Mexico and Colum- 
bia) should invade Cuba at all, it is unquestionable that this 
invasion will be made with this principle, — this genius of 
universal emancipation, — this sweeping anathema against 
the white population in front,-*-and then sir, what is the sit- 
uation of the Southern States t" 

Mr. Johnson of Louisiana : " We know that Columbia 
and Mexico have long contemplated the independence of 
that island (Cuba.) The final decision is now to be made, 
and the combination offerees and plan of attack to be formed. 
What, then, at such a crisis, becomes the duty of the Gov- 
ernment I Send your ministers instantly to this diplomatic 
assembly, where the measure is maturing. Advise with 
them— remonstrate — menace, if necessary, against a step 
so dangerous to us, and perhaps fatal to them." 

Mr. Berrien of Georgia : " The question to be determined 
is this : With a due regard to the safety of the Southern 
States, you can suffer these islands (Cuba .and Porto Rico) to 
pass into the hands of BUCANIERS, drunk with their new- 
born liberty ? If our interests and our safety shall require 
us to say to these new republics, Cuba and Porto Rico must 
remain as they are, we are free to say it, and by the blessing 
of God and the strength of our arms, to enforce the declara- 
tion ; and let me say to gentlemen, these high considerations 
do require it. The vital interests of the South demand it." 

These new republics were stigmatized by this honorable 
gentleman as bucaniers ; not that they were robbers, but be- 
cause they had ceased to rob the poor and helpless ; and the 
evidence of their being drunk with liberty, was their practi- 
cal acknowledgement of the principles of human rights, pro- 
fessed in our declaration of independence. 

Mr. Floyd of Virginia : " So far as I can see, in all its 
bearings, it (the Panama Congress) looks to the conquest of 
Cuba and Porto Rico ; or, at all events, of tearing them from 
the crown of Spain. The interests, if not safety of our own 
country, would rather require us to interpose to prevent such 
an event, and I would rather take up arms to prevent, than 
to accelerate such an occurrence." — Congressional Debates, 
2d vol. 

The facts and sentiments we have now exhibited, prove 
beyond cavil., that this mighty republic volunteered to solicit 
the aid of foreign monarchs to perpetuate slavery in Cuba, 
and was strongly disposed to incur the hazard and calamities 
of war in the cause, — not of liberty, but of bondage. 



HISTORY OF HAYTI. 59 

Having noticed our watchful guardianship over Cuba, \vc 
will next advert to 

The hostility of the Federal Government to Hayti. 

To do justice to this part of our subject, we must beg the 
patience of our reader while we briefly lay before him a few 
historical facts. 

The Island of St. Domingo was one of the most valuable 
colonies belonging to the crown of France. It is about 450 
miles long, and 150 wide. Its population in 1790, was esti- 
mated as follows : 

White inhabitants, 42,000 

Free colored inhabitants, 44,000 

Slaves, 600,000 



Total, 686,000 

Of the free colored inhabitants, numerically equal with the 
whites, many were men of education and property, landed 
proprietors, and the holders of slaves. Still they were de- 
barred from all political privileges on account of their com- 
plexion. At the commencement of the French Revolution, 
the National Assembly abolished this discrimination on ac- 
count of color, and gave the free blacks in the colonies, the 
same civil rights that were possessed by their white brethren. 
The pride of the latter led them to refuse submission to this 
humiliating decree of the mother country, and a civil war 
between the whites and the free blacks, ensued. No inter- 
ference whatever with the rights of slaveholders as such, had 
at this time been attempted, either in France or the colony ; 
and the dissensions which convulsed the island, for a long 
time related exclusively to the political condition of the free 
colored population. In August, 1791, a partial insurrection 
ef the slaves occurred, favored by the quarrels of their mas- 
ters. In some instances the free blacks united with the 
whites, in their efforts to suppress the insurrection, and in 
others, they availed themselves of the aid of the revolted 
slaves, against the planters. 

In 1792, the French Government sent over three commis- 
sioners with 6000 troops, to enforce their decree respecting 
the free blacks, and to restore order. Many of the planters, 
however, still resisted ; while others took sides with the 
Government, and the distractions of the island were now 
aggravated by a civil war between the whites themselves. 

A portion of the planters, abhorring the attempt of the 
Government to elevate the free blacks to a political equality 



60 HISTORY OP HAYTI. 

with themselves, now intrigued with Great Britain to seize 
upon the island, and thus to save them from the degrading 
consequences of republican principles. In compliance with 
their invitation, conveyed through their agent, M. Charmilly, 
an expedition was fitted out at Jamaica, for the capture of 
St. Domingo ; and on the 19th Sept. 1793, arrived at Jere- 
mie. Only a few days before the appearance of the British 
fleet on the coast, one of the French commissioners, who 
happened at the moment to be acting alone, in the absence 
of his colleagues, having received intelligence of the intended 
invasion, and knowing the disaffection of the planters, issued 
a hasty proclamation, giving freedom to all the slaves, as the 
only means of preserving the colony from conquest.* 

The free negroes and the manumitted slaves united in de- 
fending the island against the invaders, while an army of 
2000 of the white inhabitants, ranged themselves under the 
British standard. The French commissioners soon after re- 
turned to France ; great numbers of the planters emigrated ; 
and the island was virtually abandoned to the blacks, except 
so much of it as was occupied by the British troops. These 
troops were from time to time reinforced by detachments 
from Europe and the West Indies — but in vain. The blacks 
under Toussaint, who was appointed by the Government at 
home, " Governor General of the armies of St. Domingo," 
continued the contest for about five years, and finally suc- 
ceeded in driving the English from the island. Britain be- 
ing in the meantime at war with France, her naval forces 
prevented all intercourse between the colony and the mother 
country : and the blacks thus left to themselves, declared 
themselves independent on the 1st of July, 179S, and organ- 
ized the Government of Hayti. 

The peace of Amiens afforded Bonaparte an opportunity 
to attempt the subjugation of the island, and the reduction 
of its inhabitants to slavery. 

Early in January, 1802, a French army of 20,000 men 
were landed at St. Domingo, and various reinforcements 
afterwards followed. 

The war was waged with atrocious cruelty on the part of 
the French, and the blacks aided by the climate, succeeded 
in destroying about 40,000 of their enemies in eleven months; 
and on the 19th of November, 1802, the wrecks of the in- 
vading army surrendered to Dessalincs, the black chief. 



* Tho ensuing year, 1704, by a decree of the National Assembly, slavery was for- 
mally abolished throughout all the Freuch colonies. 



HOSTILITY TO IIAYTI. 61 

Since that time, Hayti has continued an independent nation, 
perfectly inoffensive in all its foreign relations ; and its en- 
tire sovereignty is at present fully acknowledged by both 
France and England, and undisputed by any power on earth. 

It is now important to inquire, what has been the conduct 
of the United States towards this heroic republic 1 

Twelve years after slavery had been abolished by a decree 
of the French Government ; after the expulsion of the armies 
of England and France ; when for three years not a hostile 
foot had pressed the soil of Hayti ; when a regularly organ- 
ized government was in full operation ; and without one 
solitary cause of complaint against the new State, the Amer- 
ican Congress passed an act, (28th Feb. 1S06,) " to suspend 
the commercial intercourse between the United States and 
certain parts of the island of St. Domingo." These certain 
parts were defined in the act, to be such parts as were not 
"in the possession and under the acknowledgement of 
France ;" and of course included the whole island. As there 
was at this time no war in fact, between Hayti and France, 
and the latter was prevented by the naval superiority of Eng- 
land, and her own continental wars, from sending a single 
soldier to Hayti ; the sole object of this act, was to distress 
and harrass the Hayti ans by depriving them of the bread- 
stuffs and other necessaries they were accustomed to receive 
from this country. It was a piece of wanton cruelty, unre- 
quired by the obligations of neutrality ; and demanded by 
France in a tone of arrogance, which would have secured its 
rejection had not the intended victims been Mack. Bona- 
paite, irritated by the loss of his army, and the defeat of his 
designs upon Hayti, resolved to starve, if possible, a people 
whom he could not conquer ; and he found in the Federal 
Government, a willing instrument of his vengeance. His Min- 
ister at Washington, in a letter to the Secretary of State, de- 
manded an immediate cessation of the commerce between 
the citizens of the United States and " the rebels of St. Do- 
mingo — that race of African slaves, the reproach and the 
refuse of nature ;" and he enforced his demand with the in- 
formation ; — "The Emperor and King, my master, expects 
from the dignity and candor of the Government of the Union, 
that an end be put to it promptly."* The letter was written 
in January ; and in February the act required was passed, 
and continued in force for two years. 

The invitation to the United States to send ministers to 
the Congress of Panama, has been already mentioned. In 

* American State papers. 5th vol. p. 154. 



62 CONGRESS TO PANAMA. 

the document conveying the invitation, it was remarked : 
" On what basis the relations of Hayti, and other parts of 
our hemisphere, that shall hereafter be in like circumstances, 
are to be placed, is a question simple at first view, but attend- 
ed with serious difficulties when closely examined. These 
arise from the different manner of regarding Africans, and 
from their different rights in Hayti, the United States, and 
in the American States. This question will be determined 
at the Isthmus.''* 

The invitation was accepted, and the instructions of our 
ministers contained the following : — " Under the actual cir- 
cumstances of Hayti, the President does not think that it would 
be proper at this time to recognize it as a new State."! This, 
be it remembered, was just a quarter of a century since the 
Haytians had declared and maintained their independence, 
and at a moment when they were enjoying the blessings and 
exercising the prerogatives of an independent State, and at 
peace with all the world. And what motive prompted the 
United States thus to exert its influence to prevent the Con- 
gress of Panama from recognizing Hayti " as a new State 1" 
— none other than the apprehension that the admission of a 
palpable truth, the independence of a black Republic, would 
prove dangerous to the perpetuity of American slavery. Is 
this slander ? Let the members of Congress speak for them- 
selves. The following sentiments were elicited in the de- 
bate on the Panama mission. 

Mr. Berrien of Georgia : — " Consistently with our own 
safety, can the people of the South permit the intercourse 
which would result from the establishing relations of any 
sort with Hayti ? Is the emancipated slave, his hands yet 
reeking" (thirty-two years after slavery had been abolished 
by the French Government) " in the blood of his murdered 
master, to be admitted into their ports, to spread the doc- 
trines of insurrection, and to strengthen and invigorate them, 
by exhibiting in his own person an example of successful re- 
volt 1 Gentlemen must be sensible — this cannot be. The 
great principle of self-preservation will be arrayed against it. 
I have been educated in sentiments of habitual reverence for 
the Constitution of the United States : I have been taught 
to consider the union of these States as essential to their 
safety. The feeling is nowhere more universal or more 
strong than among the people of the South. But they have 

" Senate Documents. 1st Sess. 19 Cong. vol. III. t Letter of Mr. Clav>. 
Secretary of State, Gth May, lo2G. 



OPINIONS IN CONGRESS. 63, 

a stronger feeling — need I name it] Is there any one who 
hears and does not understand me 1 Let me implore gen- 
tlemen not to call that leering into action by this disastrous 
policy." In plain English, the slaveholders love slavery 
more than they do the Union, and would sacrifice the last, 
rather than acknowledge as free, a people who had once 
been slaves. 

Mr. Beaton of Missouri : — " The peace of eleven States 
in this Union will not permit the fruits of a successful negro 
insurrection to be exhibited among them ; — it will not per- 
mit the fact to be seen and told, that for the murder of their 
masters and mistresses they are to find friends among the 
white people of the United States." 

Mr. Hamilton of South Carolina : — " It is proper that on 
this occasion I should speak with candor and without re- 
serve : that I should avow what I believe to be the senti- 
ments of the southern people on this question, and this is 
that Htujtian independeme is not to be tolerated in any form. 
* * * * A people will not stop to discuss the nice meta- 
physics of a federative system, when havoc and destruction 
menace them in their doors." 

Mr. Hayne of South Carolina : — " With nothing connect- 
ed with slavery can we consent to treat with other nations ; 
and least of all ought we to touch the question of the inde- 
pendence of Hayti in conjunction with the Revolutionary 
Governments whose own M&tory affords an example scarcely 
less fatal to our repose. These governments have proclaimed 
principles of liberty and equality, and have marched to vic- 
tory under the banner of universal emancipation. You find 
men of color at the head of their armies, in the Legislative 
halls, and in the Executive departments. * * * * Our pol- 
icy with regard to Hayti is plain ; we never can acknowl- 
edge her independence. ■'" * * * Let our Government direct 
all our Ministers in South America and Mexico, to protest 
against the independence of Hayti." 

Gentlemen when they talk in a passion, rarely talk wisely 
or consistently. Mr. Hayne insists that we cannot toucli the 
question of the independence of Hayti in conjunction with 
the American Revolutionary Governments ; and yet in Hie 
next breath, he is for opening negotiations with all these 
governments on this very subject. Almost every slaveholder 
assures us that the slaves, if emancipated, could not take 
care of themselves ; and yet Mr. Hayne proclaims the in>. 
portant fact, that the armies of these same governments have 
w marched to victory" with colored men at their head: and. 



G4 RESPECTING HAYTI. 

that colored men are found in tlieir Legislative halls, and 
Executive departments! 

Mr. Johnson of Louisiana : — " It may be proper to ex- 
press to the South American States the unalterable opinion 
entertained here in regard to intercourse with them. The 
unadvised recognition of that island, (Hayti) and the public 
reception of their Ministers, will nearly sever our diplomatic 
intercourse, and bring about a separation and alienation in- 
jurious to both. I deem it of the highest concern to the po- 
litical connection of these countries, to remonstrate against 
a measure so justly offensive to us, and to make that remon- 
strance effectual." — Congressional Debates, Vol. II. 

Thus the gentleman from Louisiana looked upon the re- 
cognition of Hayti by other and independent States, as a 
measure so offensive to us, as to afford us ground for quar- 
relling with them. 

We will now advance twelve years in our history, and see 
if the lapse of time has softened the hatred of our rulers to 
Hayti. On the 17th December, 1S3S, a petition was pre- 
sented to the House of Representatives, praying for the 
establishment of the usual international relations with that 
republic. No sooner was the purport of the petition an- 
nounced, than vehement objections were made to it, and no 
less than thirty-two members had the hardihood to vote 
against even its reception. They were, however, in the 
minority ; and on a motion being made to refer it to the 
Committee on Foreign Relations, the Chairman of that 
committee, himself a slaveholder, advocated the reference, 
as the best way of stifling the discussion, observing that 
" several similar memorials had been sent there the last ses- 
sion, which had never been reported on. This would take a 
similar course ; it would never be heard of again." With 
this intimation the petition was referred. A motion was 
then made to instruct the committee to report on the peti- 
tion : but, to stop the discussion, the previous question was 
moved, and the motion denied by a great majority. A few 
extracts from the speeches delivered on this occasion may be 
useful, as showing the temper and logic displayed by the 
southern members. 

Mr. Legare of South Carolina : " It (the petition) origi- 
nates in a design to revolutionize the South and convulse the 
Union, and ought therefore to be rejected with reprobation. 
As sure as you live, sir, if this course is permitted to go on, 
the sun of this Union will go down — it will go down in 
BLOOD — and go down to rise no more. I will vote un- 



BRITISH ARMY IN HAYTI. 65 

hesitatingly against nefarious designs like these. They are 
treason, — yes sir, I pronounce the authors of such things 
traitors — traitors not to their country only, but to the whole 

HUMAN RACE." 

Mr. Wise of Virginia : " We are called to recognize the 
insurrectionists who rose on their French masters. A large 
portion of those now in power in this black republic, are 
slaves who cut their master's throats. Christophe himself 
was an insurrectionist and a revolutionist. Their Govern- 
ment has the stamp of such an origin. And will any gentle- 
man tell me no\/, that slaves, aided by an English army, 
(and it is consolatory to think, when we are threatened by 
abolitionists with having our throats cut at the South, that 
these slaves in St. Domingo, though ten to one in number, 
never could have succeeded in insurrection but for the aid 
of the British army,) ought to be recognized by this Govern- 
ment, and that their being such is no argument against it 1 
No, it is the abolition spirit alone which would have us say 
to these men, whose hands are yet red with their master's 
blood : ' You shall be recognized as freemen ; we wish to 
establish international relations with you.' Never will I — 
never will my constituents be forced into this. This is the 
only body of men who have emancipated themselves by 
butchering their masters. They have long been free, I ad- 
mit ; yet, if they had been free for centuries, — if Time him- 
self should confront me, and shake his hoary locks at my op- 
position, — I should say to him, I owe more to my constitu- 
ents — to the quiet of my people — than I owe or can owe to 
mouldy prescriptions, however ancient." 

The consolation enjoyed by this gentleman, from the con- 
viction that the Haytians are indebted to a British army for 
their liberty, is not a little ludicrous. There has never been 
but one British army in Hayti, and that was sent for the pur- 
pose, not of emancipation, but of conquest ; and instead of 
aiding the blacks, it was joined by two thousand of the plant- 
ers, who looked to it as the means by which they were to 
recover their authority over their former slaves. Yet this 
army, thus aided, found itself vanquished by the despised 
blacks ; and in May, 179S, under Brigadier General Mait- 
land, capitulated to Toussaint, the black General. The his- 
tory of St. Domingo affords much and valuable instruction 
to slaveholders, but certainly very little cons:)!,!!} on. 

It may not be uninteresting to state a few facts relative to 
the present condition of a republic which so powerfully ex- 
cites the apprehensions of southern gentlemen, and to the 



66 PRESENT CONDITION OF HAYTI. 

magnitude of the commerce which our northern politicians 
are willing to sacrifice for southern votes. 

The advocates of slavery are fond of representing the 
Haytians as a horde of barbarians. We therefore give the 
following evidence, published by the British Parliament, and 
taken before one of its committees. 

Eri deuce of Vice Admiral, tfreHm. Claries Fleming, Mem- 
ber of Parliament : — " He could not speak positively of the 
increase of the Haytian population since 1804, but believed 
it had trebled since that time.* They now feed themselves, 
and they export provisions which neither the French nor the 
Spaniards had ever done before. He saw a sugar estate 
near Cape Haytian, General Boulon's, extremely well culti- 
vated and in beautiful order. Anew plantation was forming 
on the opposite side of the road. Their victuals were very 
superior to those in Jamaica, consisting chiefly of meat — 
cattle being very cheap. He saw no marks of destitution 
any where. The country seemed improving, and trade in- 
creasing. The estate he visited near the Cape was large ; 
it was calculated to make 300 hogshead of sugar. It was 
as beautifully laid out and as well managed as any estate he 
had seen in the West Indies. His official correspondence 
as Admiral, with the Haytian Government, made him attri- 
bute much efficiency to it, and it bore strong marks of civili- 
zation. There was a better police in Hayti than in the new 
South American States; the communication was more rapid ; 
the roads much better. One had been cut from Port-au- 
Prince to Cape Haytian that would do honor to any country. 
A regular port was established. The government is one 
quite worthy of a civilized people." 

In 1831, the imports into France from Hayti exceeded in 
value the imports from Sweden, Denmark, the Hanseatic 
Towns, Holland, Austria, Portugal, the French West Indies, 
or China. — McCidloch's dictionary of Commerce, p. 637. 

In 1833, the imports from Hayti into the United States 
exceeded in value our imports from Prussia* Sweden and 
Norway, Denmark and the Danish West Indies, Ireland and 
land, Holland, Belgiuifc, Dutch West Indies, British 
West Indies, Spain, Portugal, all Italy, Turkey and the Le- 
vant, or any one of the South American republics. And 
what protection is afforded to this commerce by the Federal 
Government — a Government willing to negotiate in every 
court of Europe for compensation for shipwrecked or fugitive 

* By the census of 1-Jl, the populates was stated at 03.3,000. It is unquestionably 
npwardd of a iuilliou at the present time. 



TEXAS. 67 

negroes ? " Our trade with Hayti is embarrassed ; it is sub- 
jected to severe discriminating duties. We are probably the 
least favored of any people in the ports of the republic. Ton- 
nage duties and vexatious port charges discourage and op- 
press our commerce there. I am assured that, but for these 
impediments, the trade from this country with that would be 
greatly extended. The acknowledged cause of all the em- 
barrassments to that trade is found in the fact, that our Gov- 
ernment refuses to recognize the G overament of Hayti. — 
We stand aloof, as if they were a law less tribe of savages. 
While all other powers have long since acknowledged them 
as an independent Sovereignty, we refuse to recognize them. 
Others profit by their commerce at our expense. We have 
no representative at the island of any grade, nor have they a 
public officer accredited here. No commercial relation, 
therefore, exists between the two Governments." — Speedi, 
of Mr. Grcnncll, m H. of R,, ISth December, 1S3S. 

If the treatment which Hayti has received from the United 
States, evinces the hatred of our republic to emancipation, 
we have a proof no less strong of its attachment to slavery, in 

The conduct op the Federal Government towards 
Texas. 

In 1S29, the Republic of Mexico having achieved her own 
independence, gave liberty to every slave within her limits. 
This State had a vast and fertile, but thinly peopled territo- 
ry, adjacent to Louisiana. In this territory within a few 
years past, a large number of adventurers from the United 
States, had taken up their residence with the consent, and 
under the jurisdiction of Mexico. These adventurers sighed 
for the sweets of slavery, which they had enjoyed in their 
native land; and as the soil was adapted to the cotton culti- 
vation, they became restless under the requirement of the 
Government, either to till it themselves, or honestly to pay 
those who tilled it for them. Hence, they conceived the 
idea of transferring their allegiance from Mexico, to another 
republic less tenacious of human rights. Nor was a large 
portion of that other republic less anxious to acquire a new 
market for slaves, and a new territory which -would give to 
the slaveholding interest a preponderance in the national 
councils. Judge Upshur in 1829, remarked in the Virginia 
Convention : " If Texas should be obtained, which he strong- 
ly desired, it would raise the price of slaves, and be a great 
advantage to the slaveholders in that State ;" and in 1S32, 
Mr. Gholston declared in the Virginia Legislature, that " he 



68 INVASION OP TEXAS. 

believed the acquisition of Texas would raise the price of 
slaves fifty per cent, at least." Virginia, it will be recol- 
lected, is a breeding State, and therefore interested in the 
opening of a new market. The planting States have no 
wish to raise the price of slaves, but are deeply concerned 
for the perpetuity of the system. One of their distinguished 
politicians published a series of essays on the policy of annex- 
in«- Texas to the United States ; a territory, which he con- 
tended was large enough to be divided into nine slave States ; 
which would counterbalance the increasing number of free 
States at the North. 

The Federal Government ever ready to promote the slave- 
holding interest, commenced a negotiation for the purchase 
of Texas, and offered four millions of dollars for the territo- 
ry* The offer was promptly rejected, and other means 
were resorted to. 

Texan land companies were formed at the North, for the 
sale of extensive tracts of land, said to have been obtained 
by grants, from the Mexican Government. Capitalists, pol- 
iticians, and demagogues participated in these splendid 
schemes of speculation, and became vociferous in the cause 
of Texan liberty. At the same time, crowds of emigrants 
repaired to the territory, many carrying their slaves with 
them. At last, these men feeling themselves strong enough, 
raised the standard of rebellion in September, 1S35, and on 
the 2d of the succeeding March, issued their declaration of 
independence. The Mexicans of course, endeavored to 
quell the insurrection ; but, although nominally fighting with 
their own subjects, they were in fact contending against an 
invasion from the United States. The truth of this assertion 
will scarcely be questioned : yet it may be well to support 
it by a few facts. The following extracts from the journals 
of the day, will, it is presumed, be sufficient. 

" Who will go to Texas ? — Major J. W. Harvey of Lin- 
colnton, has been authorized by me, with the consent of 
Major-General Hunt, an agent in the western counties of 
North Carolina, to receive and enrol volunteer emigrants to 
Texas ; and will conduct such as may wish to emigrate to 
that Republic, about the 1st of October next, at the expense 
of the Republic of Texas. J. P. Henderson, 

Brig. Gen. of the Texan Army." 
North Carolina Paper. y 

* See iMtruettana from Mr. Van Bureu, Secretary oi'State, to Mr. Poinsett, Miuister 
to Mexico, August io, le~9. 



INVASION OF TEXAS. 69 

" Three hundred Men for Texas. — Gen. Dunlap of Ten- 
nessee, is about to proceed to Texas, with the above number 
of men. The whole corps wire now at Memphis. Every 
man is completely armed, the corps having been originally 
raised for the Florida war. This force we have no doubt, 
will be able to carry every thing before it." — Vicksburg 
(Miss.) Register. 

"Since early last winter, aperies of transactions have 
passed before us in open day, the undisguised object of 
which has been to enlist troops, and procure arms to aid the 
Texans in their war with Mexico. Troops have been enlist- 
ed — arms have been obtained. Their military parades have 
been exhibited in our streets — they have embarked at our 
wharf — have proceeded to Texas — united themselves with 
her troops, and joined with them in war against Mexico. Is 
it not a fact that every stand of public arms deposited at this 
place by the State, have been sent to Texas, with the conni- 
vance of those who had charge of them V* — Cincinnati Gaz. 

Meetings were held in various places, and speeches made, 
and resolutions passed in favor of the Texan pat riots. 

At a meeting in Cincinnati, of the friends of Texas, it was 
resolved : " That no law either human or divine, except sucli 
as are formed by tyrants for their sole benefit, forbids our as- 
sisting the Texans ; and such law, if any exists, we do not 
as Americans choose to obey." 

The Federal Government far from taking any efficient 
measures to arrest this invasion of a friendly and neighbor- 
ing State, sent an imposing force under Gen. Gaines, into the 
Mexican territory, under the pretence of protecting the fron- 
tiers ! With what result is shown by the following article. 

From the Pensacola Gazette. 

" About the middle of last month, Gen. Gaines sent an 
officer of the United States army into Texas, to reclaim some 
deserters. He found them already enlisted m the Texan 
service to the number of two hundred. They still wore the 
uniform of our army, but refused of course to return. The 
commander of the Texan. army was applied to, to enforce 
their return, but his only reply was, that the soldiers might 
go, but that he had no authority to send them back. This is 
a new view of our Texan relations" 

The adventurers in Texas had no sooner set up themselves, 
than they adopted a constitution, in which they aimed, — 
first, to secure themselves and their children forever, the 
blessings of slavery ; and secondly, to acquire the aid and 



70 SLAVERY ESTABLISHED. 

protection of the United States. The first object was to be 
attained by a constitutional prohibition of both private and 
legislative emancipation ; an<$ by making it a fundamental 
law of the Republic, that no free black or mulatto person 
should reside within its boundaries ; and the second object, 
by giving to the United States in perpetuity, a monoply of 
the slave market in Texas, — the importation of slaves from 
any other country, being absolutely prohibited, thus promis- 
ing to realize the golden visions of the Virginia breeders. 

A feverish impatience now pervaded the southern States 
for the acknowledgement of Texan independence ; — an im- 
patience in which the northern speculators full)'' participated. 
Acknowledgement it was seen, must precede annexation, 
since the latter could only be effected by a treaty with Texas 
as an independent power. Still policy required that this 
measure should be cautiously managed, lest the North should 
become alarmed at this scheme for vesting the whole politi- 
cal power of the Union in the hands of the slaveholders, and 
the northern members of Congress be found for once refrac- 
tory. 

Congress met in December, 1S36, and on the 22d of the 
^ame month, President Jackson sent them a special message 
in relation to Texas. He remarked : " Prudence seems to 
dictate that we should still stand aloof, and maintain our pre- 
sent attitude, if not till Mexico, or one of the great foreign 
powers shall recognize the independence of the new Gov- 
ernment, at least until the lapse of time, or the course of event* 
shall have j)roved, beyond all cavil or dispute, the ability of that 
covntry to maintain their separate sovereignty, and to uphold 
the Government constituted by them." 

This message dissipated all apprehensions on the part of 
the friends of freedom, of a speedy acknowledgement, and 
relieved Congress from the remonstrances and petitions with 
which their tables would otherwise have been loaded. 

It was obvious, however, that if we could contrive to be- 
come embroiled in a war with Mexico, we might then seize 
upon Texas, and hold it by right of conquest, without any 
violation of our neutral obligations ; and that by this process, 
the annexation might be eiiected with even more facility 
than by a compact with Texas as an independent power. 
Accordingly about two weeks after the late message, the 
President sent another to Congress on our grievances against 
Mexico — grievances about which the people at large knew 
and cared nothing. This message recommended the passage 
of a law authorizing the President to employ a naval force 



RECOGNITION* OF TEXAS. 71 

against Mexico if she refused " to come to an amicable ad- 
justment of the matters in controversy between us, upon an- 
other demand thereof, made fro?ti on board 0,1c of our v&seit 
of war on the coast of Mexico:' This proposition was coldly 
received, neither Congress nor the nation seeming to approve 
of such a novel and summary way of declaring war ; and no 
one having the slightest desire ibr war, except those who 
were anxious for the annexation.. It being found that a war 
could not be had, another game was played. The session 
was to close on the 3d March. The strongest opposition to 
Texas was to be apprehended in the Lower House. Four 
days before the termination of the session, a motion was there 
made to add a clause to the appropriation bill, making pro- 
vision for the salary of a diplomatic agent to Texas. There 
was no time for long speeches, and the motion was adopted 
with the amendment " to be sent by the President whenever 
he shall receive satisfactory evidence that Texas is an inde- 
pendent power, and shall see fit to open a diplomatic inter- 
course with her." The late message proved that the Presi- 
dent had not yet received " the satisfactory evidence," and 
anticipated it only from the action of the great foreign pow- 
ers, or " the lapse of time." Little hesitation therefore was 
felt in leaving the subject under the control of the Execu- 
tive. The House of Representatives, in which there was a 
majority of northern members, having been thus managed, 
and a salary secured for a Minister to Texas ; the veil was 
thrown aside in the Senate, and two days before the end of 
the session, it was " Resolved, that the State of Texas, hav- 
ing established and maintained an independent government, 
capable of performing those duties, foreign and domestic, 
which appertain to independent governments, and it appear- 
ing that there is no longer any reasonable prospect of the 
successful termination of the war by Mexico against said 
State, it is expedient and proper, and in conformity with the 
laws of nations and the precedents of this Government in 
like cases, that the independent political existence of said 
State, be acknowledged by the Government of the United 
States." 

As the whole tenor of this resolution was in direct oppo- 
sition to the message of the 22d December, and as nothing 
had occurred since that date to weaken the positions assumed 
in the message, one of the Senators in opposing the resolu- 
tion, very naturally alluded to the views entertained by the 
President, On this, Mr. Walker, a Senator from Mississippi, 
rose in his place and declared, that " he liad it from the Pre- 



72 CONDUCT TOWARDS HAYTI AND TEXAS. 



t's oiv/i lips, that if he were a Senator, he would vote for 
this resolution ! /" 

At eleven o'clock of the night of the 3d March, an hour 
before his term of office expired, and just as the Senate was 
about adjourning, the President sent them the nomination 
of a Minister to Texas. 

The conduct of the Federal Government towards Texas 
and Hayti, places in a strong light the influence of slavery 
on our national councils. The latter State has been inde- 
pendent both in name and in fact for thirty-seven years, yet 
we still refuse to recognize her. Twelve months after Texas 
declared her independence, she was received by us into the 
family of nations, and honored by an interchange of diplo- 
matic agents. For thirty-five yeais, the soil of Hayti has not 
been trodden by an invader ; only ten months before the ac- 
knowledgement of Texas, a Mexican army was carrying ter- 
ror and destruction through its territory. That army had 
indeed been defeated, but another was preparing to renew 
the contest. Hayti had long been at peace with all the world. 
Mexico claimed Texas as its own, and solemnly avowed its 
determination to chastise and suppress the revolt. Hayti 
achieved her independence after a long and arduous strug- 
gle with powerful armies, and has a population of a million 
to maintain it. Texas, when acknowledged, could appeal 
only to the fortunate result of a single battle as evidence of 
her national power, while she had no more than 60,000 in- 
habitants to contend against the eight millions of Mexico. 
With Hayti, we had a large and valuable commerce, while 
our commerce with Texas was only in expectancy. Yet has 
slavery estranged our Government from the one nation, and 
led it to welcome to its embrace another, incomparably infe- 
rior in political strength and moral worth. 

The indecent haste with which Texas was acknowledged, 
and the trickery by which the acknowledgement was effect- 
ed, were prompted by the desire of annexation. A southern 
journal speaks thus frankly on the subject. " Does any sober 
observer contend — can he in the face of facts, that Texas 
has substantially, according to the usages of nations, accom- 
plished her independence % Was there not an even chance, 
to put the matter on the most favorable footing, that the 
victory of Jacinto might this campaign be reversed % But 
natural feeling has outstripped the prudence of our Govern- 
ment, usually discreet and judicious, anil social sympathy has 
done what political precedent, and possibly expediency, might 
not have sanctioned. The debate in the British Parliament 



ANNEXATION OF TEXAS. 73 

shows how well State papers and official ceremonies" (viz. 
the President's message,) " may delude, or seem to delude 
foreign governments. While Lord Palmerston and O'Con- 
nell were defending our Government from any improper 
haste in acknowledging the independence of Texas, the deed 
is consummated!"— The Tort Gibson (Miss.) Southerner. 

The whole slave region, with scarcely an exception, de- 
manded a union with the new State. " The very reasons," 
said the Charleston Mercury, " so intemperately urged by the 
North against it, that it will increase the political weight of 
the southern States, and perpetuate and extend the curse of 
slavery, are our best reason^ far it." 

The Legislatures of South Carolina, Mississippi, and Ten- 
nessee, all passed resolutions in favor of the annexation. 
Many individuals at the North had likewise a deep pecuniary 
interest in the question. They had speculated largely in 
Texas lands, but their title would be of but little value, so 
long as they depended on the faith of the lawless adventurers 
who possessed the country. Could that country be received 
into the Union, and subjected to the acts of Congress and 
the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, their purchases might 
ensure to themselves or their families, princely estates. A 
writer in the Salem Gazette, (Mass.) probably a speculator, 
in vindicating the annexation, thus appealed to the avarice 
of New-England. " It is calculated that the value of one 
kind of property in the South, slaves, will be enhanced so 
much, that that portion of our country will realize one or 
two hundred millions of dollars ; and the South cannot be 
enriched without benefiting the North — the money will nat- 
ural! ;/ come litre at last" 

Tlie people of Texas were no less desirous of annexation 
than southern slaveholders, or northern speculators. The 
plan of union was avowed from almost the very commence- 
ment of the rebellion. In August, 1836, S. F. Austin, in an 
address offering himself as a candidate for the Presidency, 
told the people : " I am in favor of the annexation, and will 
do all in my power to effect it with the least possible delay." 
W. H. Jack, a candidate for the legislature, declared : "I am 
decidedly and unequivocally in favor of annexing Texas to 
the United States." Gen. Houston, the Commander-in- 
chief, intimated that M the annexation was essential to the 
interests of the new country." The Texan Congress resol- 
ved, " that the President of the Republic of Texas be em- 
powered and authorized to despatch a commissioner or com- 
missioners to the United States of America, to obtain a ne- 



Y4 ANNEXATION OF TEXAS. 

gotiation of our independence, and enter into a treaty with 
that Government for a union on a footing with the original 
States." The first condition prescribed for this proposed 
union, was, " the free and unmolested authority over 

THEIR SLAVE POPULATION." 

On the 4th August, 1837, the negotiation was opened by 
the Texan Minister at Washington, by a proposition " to 
unite the two people under one and the same government." 
The acceptance of this proposition would of course have 
been equivalent to a declaration of war against Mexico ; a 
responsibility which Mr. Van Buren did not see fit to assume, 
especially in the recess of Congress. He declined entering 
into the negotiation, on the grounds that the United States 
were at present, at peace with Mexico, and that that power 
had not acknowledged the independence of Texas. As this 
answer merely jwstponed the annexation on account of an 
obstacle easily removed, it was entirely satisfactory to the 
South, and the more so as the President's message to Con- 
gress on the 4th of the ensuing December, wore a very bel- 
ligerent aspect towards Mexico. 

This formal attempt at annexation roused the fears of the 
North, and innumerable remonstrances against the measure 
were presented to Congress. In the meantime Mexico, by 
proposing a submission of her differences with the United 
States to arbitration, removed all pretence for immediate 
war. Under these circumstances, the southern delegation 
in Congress thought it most prudent not to press the annex- 
ation. The Texans, moreover, finding themselves unmo- 
lested by Mexico, who had become involved in war with 
France; and observing the strong hostility manifested to- 
wards the measure in the United States, formally withdrew 
her application for admission into the Union. It is folly, 
however, to suppose that the project of annexation is aban- 
doned either by the South or by Texas ; nor does it need 
the gift of prophesy to foresee that the first favorable oppor- 
tunity of making war upon Mexico, will be readily embra- 
ced by the Federal Government. Should such a war be 
effected, the dominion of the whip may, perhaps, be extended 
from Maryland to Panama. 

It may not be amiss here to compare the conduct of the 
Federal" Government towards the Texan and the Canadian 
rebels. The first were slaveholders re-establishing slavery 
on a soil from which it had been banished ; and they enjoyed 
from the first the sympathy of our Government, who took 
care to interpose no real obstacle to an invasion on their be- 



CENSORSHIP OF THE TRESS. 75 

half from the United States ; while for the purpose of aiding 
them it labored to excite an immediate war with Mexico. 
The Canadian rebels were professedly fighting for liberty, 
and should they succeed, there was no probability that negro 
slavery would crown their triumph. They, like the Texans, 
looked to us for aid ; but the President, now alive to the ob- 
ligations of neutrality, and finding the existing laws insuffi- 
cient to enforce them, applied to Congress and received ad- 
ditional powers. Troops were sent to the frontiers, not to 
swell by desertion the ranks of the rebels, but in good faith, 
forcibly to prevent American citizens from abetting the re- 
volt. A war with Mexico was desired by the slaveholders, 
and the President was for negotiating on hoard an armed 
vessel. A war with Great Britain, emphaticaUy an anti- 
slavery nation, is now viewed with horror and drsmay by the 
whole South,* and the Executive has sedulously endeavored 
to avoid it. 

"We have now presented numerous instances of the action 
of the Federal Government in behalf of slavery ; but our 
task is not completed. We are still to view that Govern- 
ment, which, in the language of the Constitution, was estab- 
lished " to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and 
our posterity ;" assailing the constitutional rights of the citi- 
zen, in order to rivet the fetters of the slave ; striving to ex- 
tinguish the freedom of the press, the freedom of debate, and 
the right of petition, to perpetuate property in human flesh. 
These, we are sensible, are strong assertions ; we solicit at- 
tention to the facts on which they are founded, and first to 

TlIE ATTEMPT OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO ESTAB- 
LISH A CENSORSHIP OF THE PRESS. 

In the summer of 1835, the Anti-slavery Society in New- 
York, directed their publisher to forward a' number of their 
periodical papers, containing facts and disquisitions on the 
subject of slavery, to various southern gentlemen of distinc- 
tion, in the hope of exciting by this means, a spirit of inquiry 
among persons of influence and character. But it was pre- 
cisely such a spirit of inquiry, that the advocates of perpet- 
ual bondage feared might be fatal to their favorite institu- 
tion. Hence they affected to believe that the papers sent to 
the masters, were intended to excite the slaves to insurrec- 
tion, and they succeeded in maddening the populace to fury. 

* A distinguished southern Senator, speaking of the importance of preserving our 
neutrality on the Canada frontier, declared that in his opinion " a war with England 
would be the heaviest calamity that could befall the country." 



76 mr. Kendall's letter. 

A mob broke into the Charleston Post-Office, and seizing a 
quantity of anti-slavery papers, burned them in the street. 
This outrage was virtually approved by the City Council ; 
and at a public meeting, a committee of " gentlemen" was 
appointed to take charge of the northern mail on its arrival, 
accompany it to the Post-Office, and see that no paper advo- 
cating the rights of man, should be delivered to their owners. 
The Post-Master informed the head of the department, that 
under existing circumstances, he had determined to suppress 
all anti-slavery publications, and asked for instructions for the 
future. It should here be recollected that of all the political 
advisers of the President, Mr. Kendall, at this time acting as 
Post-Master General, was the most odious to the opposite 
party. He had been appointed during the recess of the 
Senate, and it was regarded as a matter of course, that on 
the meeting of that body, in which the opposition had a ma- 
jority, his nomination would be rejected. The Constitution 
forbade a censorship of the press, and had the people been 
disposed to delegate so formidable a power, they certainly 
would not have vested it in the 10,000 deputies of the Post- 
Master General. The law moreover expressly required eve- 
ry Post-Master to deliver the papers received by him, to the 
persons to whom they were directed. 

Such were the circumstances under which Mr. Kendall 
returned his famous answer. After stating that not having 
seen the papers in question, he could not judge of their char- 
acter, but had been informal that they were incendiary, in- 
flammatory, and insurrectionary, he added : " By no act or 
direction of mine, official or private, could I be induced to 
aid knowingly in giving circulation to papers of this descrip- 
tion, directly or indirectly. We owe an obligation to the 
laws, but a higher one to the communities in which we live ; 
and if the former be perverted to destroy the latter, it is 'pa- 
triotism to disregard them. Entertaining these views, I can- 
not sanction and will not condemn the step you have taken." 
This letter taught the Senate that the new officer was willing 
to conduct the Post-Office in a manner calculated to protect 
the " domestic institution" from the assaults of truth and ar- 
gument, and his nomination was confirmed. Mr. Kendall 
was attire date of his letter, a member of the Cabinet, and it 
was understood that the novel, extraordinary, and dangerous 
doctrine of that letter received the sanction of the President. 

On the opening of Congress, President Jackson in his 
message, recommended the " passing of such a law as will 
prohibit under severe penalties, the circulation in the south- 



president's calumny. 77 

ern States through the mails, of incendiary publications in- 
tended to instigate the slaves to insurrection." The propo- 
sed law it seems, was not to prohibit the printing of certain 
papers, nor their committal to the mails in the northern 
States, but only their circulation in the slave region. Of 
course certain persons, Post-Masters we presume, were to be 
required under " heavy penalties," to stop these papers ; and 
they were necessarily to be judges of the character of the 
papers, and of the intentions of their writers. From what 
code of despotism did our very democratic President derive 
his plan for destroying the efficiency of the Press % By a 
contemptible quibble, this plan was to evade the constitu- 
tional guarantee of the freedom of the press. It was not to 
interfere with the press — not at all — it was merely to pre- 
vent the circulation of its productions ! The press was still 
to be free to pour forth its arguments against slavery, only 
"heavy penalties" were to prevent the people from reading 
them ! The reason moreover assigned for this high-handed 
act of tyranny, was a most willful calumny. It was to pre- 
vent the circulation in the southern States of publications in- 
tended to excite the slaves to insurrection. Such a proposal 
from the first magistrate of the country to Congress, and fol- 
lowing the affair at Charleston, and Mr. Kendall's letter, 
irresistibly fixes upon the members of the American Anti- 
slavery Society at New-York, the charge of sending papers 
into southern States for the purpose and with the desire of 
effecting the massacre of their fellow-citizens. If the Presi- 
dent really believed that such was the object of the New- 
York abolitionists, and such the character of their publica- 
tions, and if he thought it his official duty to bring the sub- 
ject before Congress, he owed it to himself, to the country, 
to truth and to justice, to have submitted to Congress the 
facts and documents, on which he foundec! his proposed inva- 
sion of the constitutional rights of his fellow-citizens. But 
he cautiously avoided specifying a single fact, or quoting a 
single sentence in support of his tremendous accusation, or 
in justification of his most unwarrantable proposition ; and 
when written to by the acting committee of the New- York 
Society for proof of his charge against them, he deemed it 
most prudent not to return an answer ! Surely the burden 
of proof rests upon him, who in a solemn official address to 
the Legislature, holds up a portion of his fellow-citizens as 
miscreants engaged in plotting murder and insurrection ; 
and urges the enaction of a law to counteract their execrable 
machinations. 



78 INSURRECTIONARY LANGUAGE. 

It is often difficult to prove a negative ; but in this instance, 
the falsehood of the President's charge is amply demonstrated 
by an official document from the slaveholders themselves. 
We give this document, not to exculpate the members of the 
New- York Society from a calumny which their own charac- 
ters abundantly refute, but to show in a strong light the un- 
principled means to which the Federal Government is capa- 
ble of resorting to uphold the " peculiar institution " of the 
South. 

A Grand Jury in Alabama, conceived the bright idea, that 
the publication of tracts at the North against slavery might 
be arrested, by indicting the publishers as felons, and then 
demanding them from the Governors of their respective 
States as fugitives from southern justice. It was necessary, 
however, to specify in the indictment, the precise crime of 
which they had been guilty; a necessity which the Presi- 
dent regarded as not applicable to his message. We may 
well suppose therefore, that the Grand Jury would endeavor 
to secure the success of this, their first experiment, by select- 
ing from the various publications, alluded to by the Presi- 
dent and Mr. Kendall, as sent to the South for the purpose 
of exciting insurrection, the most insurrectionary, cut-throafc 
passages, they could find. Behold the result. 

" State of Alabama, ) Circuit Court, September 
Tuscaloosa County, J Term, 1S35, 

"The Grand Jurors, * * * * upon their oath present* 
that Robert G. Williams, late of said county, being a wicked, 
malicious, seditious, and ill-disposed person, and being great- 
ly disaffected to the laws and government of said State, and 
feloniously, wickedly, maliciously, and seditiously contriving, 
devising, and intending to produce conspiracy, insurrection, 
and rebellion among the slave population of said State, and 
to alienate and "withdraw the affection, fidelity,'and allegiance 
of said slaves from their masters and owners, on the tenth 
day of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand 
eight hundred and thirty-five, at the county aforesaid, feloni- 
ously, wickedly, maliciously, and seditiously did cause to be 
distributed, circulated, and published, a seditious paper called 
'The Emancipatqr,' in which paper is published according 
to the tenor and effect following, that is to say : ' God com- 
mands, and all nature cries out, that man should not he held as 
property. The system of making men property, has plm 

- '0,000 of our fellow-countrymen into the, deepest physical 
and moral depredation, and they are ccery moment sinking deep- 



ACTION OF THE SENATE. 7!> 

er.' In open violation of the Act of the General Assembly 
in such case made and provided, to the evil and pernicious 
example of all others in like case offending, and against the 
peace and dignity of the State of Alabama."* 

In the Senate, the recommendation of the President was 
referred to a committee, who reported a bill prohibiting 
Post-Masters from delivering " any pamphlet, newspaper, 
handbill, or other printed paper, or pictorial representation, 
touching the suhject of slavery in any State, in which their 
circulation is prohibited by law." The object of this bill 
was by means of federal legislation, to build around the 
slave States a rampart against the assaults of light and truth. 
Its absurdity was equalled only by its wickedness. Not a 
newspaper containing a debate in Congress, a report from a 
committee, a message from the President, a letter from the 
West Indies, "touching the subject of slavery," could be- 
legally delivered from a southern Po3t-Office; and thousands 
of Post-Masters were to be employed in opening envelopes, 
and poring over their contents, to catch a reference to the 
" domestic institution." 

By this bill, the Federal Government virtually surrender- 
ed to the States, the freedom of the press, and nullified tin 
guarantee of this inestimable privilege, given by our fathers 
in the Constitution to every citizen. This bill, moreover, 
prepared the way for the destruction of civil and religious 
liberty. If every paper ^touching the subject of slavery 
might be suppressed, then the same fate might just as con- 
stitutionally be awarded to every paper touch in g the conduct 
of the administration, or the doctrine of the Trinity. It es- 
tablished a censorship of the press on one subject, which 
might afterwards be extended to others. Yet this bill, ab- 
surd and unconstitutional as it was, went through its regular 
stages with little opposition, till the important question was 
taken on its engrossment ; — the vote stood IS to IS. The 
easting vote was now required from Mr. Van Euren, who, 
as Vice President, occupied the chair. He gave it for the 
slaveholders, and received from them at the ensuing election, 
sixty-one electoral votes, by means of which, he became 
President of the United States.t On the final question, the 



♦Another count was added for distributing "The Emr.ncipator," but without phing 
any extracts. It i.^ - sary to add, that Williams had never been in Alabama. 

Yet on tliis indictment, he was demanded of the New-York Executive as a fugitive 
the Governor of Alabama. 

tThe two Senators from New-York, Messrs. Wright and Tallmt'dge, political friends, 
of Mr. Van Burep, supported the bill. It is iJue to justice to mention, that the bill was 
finally lost by the voles of several southern Senators. 



80 RIGHT OF PETITION. 

bill was rejected, and this attempt to trammel the press for 
the protection of slavery, defeated. A very different result 
however, has attended 

The effort of the Federal Government to nullify 
the right of petition and the freedom of debate. 

For thirty years past, petitions have been presented to 
Congress for the abolition of slavery in the District of Co- 
lumbia, and the national territories; and until latterly, were 
received and treated like other petitions. But having with- 
in a few years prodigously increased in number, and some 
northern members having shown a disposition to advocate 
their prayer, a most extraordinary course has been pursued 
in relation to them. The reason of this course is explained 
by the following passage from a speech by Mr. Strange, a 
Senator from North Carolina. " Every agitation of this sub- 
ject (slavery,) weakens die moral force in our favor ; and 
breaks down the moral barriers which now serve to protect 
and secure us. We liave every tiling to lose, caul nothing to 
gain by agitation and discuss i on." 

The frankness of this confession is as remarkable as its 
truth is unquestionable ; and it shows us why the advocates 
of slavery instead of meeting their opponents in argument, 
have sought to silence them by brute force, and penal enact- 
ments. 

One of the most unequivocal and undoubted of all consti- 
tutional rights is that of petition, and it is moreover, express- 
ly guaranteed by the Constitution. But this right has been 
most audaciously nullified by both brancb.es of the National 
Legislature. The Senate have not, it is true, avowedly re- 
fused to receive anti-slavery petitions, but they have adopted 
a course which answers the same purpose. The practice for 
some years past has been to lay the question of reception on 
the table without deciding it, and the petition not being in 
fact received, cannot be discussed, nor any measure respect- 
ing it taken. This course is no less at variance with the 
constitutional rights of the petitioners, than it is with those 
of the members of the Senate. The rights of petition and 
freedom of debate are both nullities, if the body to which a 
prayer is addressed, is prohibited from listening to it, and 
the individual members are prohibited from noticing it. — 
Would it be no violation of the Constitution were the Senate 
to order that every petition, " touching the subject of slave- 
ry," should be delivered to their doorkeeper, to be commit- 
ted by him to the flames I And yet in what particular, are 



FREEDOM OF DEBATE. SI 

the rights of the petitioners more respected by the practice 
we have mentioned 1 The petitions are not indeed burned, 
but they are left in the pockets of those to whom they were 
entrusted ; and not being 1 received, the Senate is supposed 
to be ignorant of their contents, and of course no member is 
permitted to discuss their merits, or to propose any measure 
founded upon them. Let us now turn to what is regarded 
as the popular branch, — the House of Representatives, — 
intended to be the special guardian of the liberties of the 
people, as the Senate is of the rights of the Stales. 

In May, 1S36, a committee reported to the House, a reso- 
lution prefaced with this extraordinary avowal : " Whereas 
it is extremely important and desirable, that the agitation 
on this subject (slavery) should be finally arrested for the 
purpose of restoring tranquility to the public mind, your 
committee respectfully recommend the following resolution." 

Here then is an acknowledged, unblushing interference 
by the Federal Government, in behalf of slavery ; an avowed 
interference to arrest that agitation, which we are assured 
by Mr. Strange, "breaks down the moral barriers// which 
serve to protect and secure a system of iniquitous cruelty 
and oppression. To arrest this agitation, the committee did 
not scruple to recommend a measure, breaking down the 
constitutional barriers erected to protect and secure the 
rights and liberties of the people of the United States. The 
resolution reported by the committee, was adopted by the 
House, on the 26th of May, 1836, and is in these words : 

" Resolved, That all petitions, memorials, resolutions, and 
propositions relating in any y: ay, or to any extent whatever, 
to the subject of slavery, shall without being either printed 
or referred, be laid on the table, and that no farther action 
whatever shall be had thereon." Ayes 117 — Nays 6S. 

It is worthy of remark, that of the ayes 3 no less than 62 
were from the free States ! The ad v< n this resolution , 

conscious that it could bear discussion as little as slavery 
itself, caused it to be adopted through the operation of the 
previous question, by a silent vote. 

We have exhibited the character of slavery and the slave 
trade at the seat of the Federal Government, and have shown 
that Congress is the local legislature of the District of Co- 
lumbia, having " exclusive jurisdiction over it in all cases 
whatever." Now one of the peculiar atrocities of this reso- 
lution is, that it wrests from every member of the House, 
his constitutional right to j^opose such measures for the gov- 
ernment of the District as justice and humanity may require. 

F 



52 RIGHT OF PETITION. 

Slaves might be burned alive in the streets of the Capital ; 
the slavers might be crowded to suffocation with human vic- 
tims ; every conceivable cruelty might be practised, and no 
one member of the local legislature could be permitted to 
propose even a committee of inquiry, " relating in any way, 
or to any extent whatever, to the subject of slavery !" 

The fact that G2 northern members on this occasion, ar- 
rayed themselves on the side of the slaveholders, affords a 
melancholy and alarming proof of the corrupting influence 
which slavery is exerting on the morality and patriotism of 
the free States. 

This foolish and wicked expedient to " restore tranquili- 
ty" to the people, by trampling on their rights and gagging 
their representatives, failed of success. The petitioners at 
this session were 34,000, — at the next the number was 
swelled to one hundred and ten thousand ! and the gag 
was renewed. During' the session of 1S37-S, the number 
rose to three hundred thousand. Early in the last men- 
tioned session, a member from Vermont, presented a petition 
for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, and 
took the liberty to offer some remarks on the subject of 
slavery. This attempt to break down "the moral barriers," 
threw the southern members into great trepidation, and the 
scene which ensued, illustrates the system of intimidation, to 
which we have already adverted. The Speaker was inter- 
rupted by a gentleman from Virginia, calling aloud, and ask- 
in"- his colleagues to retire with him from the hall; — ano- 
ther from Greorgia exclaimed, that, he hoped the whole south- 
ern delegation would do the same ; — a third from South Car- 
olina declared, that all the representatives from that State 
'had already signed an agreement.' The House adjourned, 
and a southern member invited the gentlemen from theslave- 
holdirig States to moot immediately in an adjoining room. The 
meeting was held,' but its proceedings were not made pub- 
lic. The result, however, was manifest in the introduction 
next mornino-, of another uag resolution, directing all memo- 
: . petitions, and papers touching the abolition of slavery 
.(■national ten and of the American slave trade, 

to be laid on the table, without being printed, read, debated, 
or referred, and that no farther action should he had thereon. 
Through the acquiescence of northern members, it was 
passed by a silmt rule 

At flie beginning of the next session, a meeting of the ad- 
ministration members was held, at which it was determined 
to renew the gag ; and as a proof of the devotion of the dem- 



ACTION OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 83 

ocractic party at the North to the cause of slavery, it was ar- 
ranged that now, for the first time, the odious measure should 
he proposed by a northern man : nay, not merely a northern 
man, but a native of New-England — a representative from 
New-Hampshire. The resolution was accordingly introdu- 
ced, and was passed on the 12th December, 1S3S, and has 
given notoriety to the name of Atherton. 

Thus we see a persevering, systematic effort on the part 
of Congress to protect slavery by suppressing debate, and 
throwing contempt upon the petitions of hundreds of thous- 
ands of American citizens. That this should be done by 
slaveholders was perhaps to have been expected ; but that 
they should be aided in such a desperate assault upon con- 
stitutional liberty by northern men, for the paltry considera- 
tion of southern votes and southern trade, is mortifyin" and 
alarming. The meeting of extremes is a trite illustration of 
human inconsistency. If, in Dr. Johnson's time, the loudest 
yelps for liberty were heard from the drivers of slaves ; the 
loudest yelps in the northern States against aristocracy, char- 
tered monopolies and oppression of the poor, are now heard 
from men who have labored to perpetuate the bondage of 
millions, by gag laws, and restrictions on the freedom of 
speech and the press. These men are acting from party 
views, and are rushing to battle under the war cry of " Van 
Buren and slavery," in hopes, through southern auxiliaries, 
of enjoying the spoils of victory. Others again, without t the 
slightest sympathy in the political principles of these men, 
and with their ears stuffed, and their hearts padded with 
cotton, are co-operating with them in behalf of slavery, from 
their love of southern trade* 

"The following - arc strong- and amusing instances of the meeting of extremes. In 
the Spring of 1837, the whig merchants of .Vw-York, sent a deputation 
ton 10 request the President to adopt certain measures to relieve the commerc 
barrassments of the country. Tin; request was declined, and a great meeting was 
convened to receive the report of the deputation. The report which was adopted by 
the meeting, recommended efforts to displace Mr. Van Buren, and as on- mean.- of ef- 
fecting this object, exhorted the merchants to "appeal to our brethren of the South 
for their generous co-operation ; and promise them that those who believe, the pos- 
session of property of any kind" (not excepting men, women, and children,) " is an 
evidence of merit, will he the last to interfere with the rights of property of any kind; 
di>courage any effort to awaken an excitement, the hare idea of which should make 
every husband and father shudder icith horror." In plain English, 
would make common cause with the New-York merchants against Mr. Van Buren, they 
in return would make common cause with the slaveholders against the aboliti 
But democrats know the value of southern vote ell as the whig . 

ingly we fmd in the Washington Globe of Feb. 9, 1839, a speech intended to 
delivered, but prevented by the gag resolution, by Mr. Eli .Moore, a double-n 1 
democrat, President of the V ".--York Trades' Union, and representative from that city 
in Congress. This gentleman tells us " the wild, enthusiastic, and impetuous spirit 
which kindled the fires of Sniithticld, and strewed the plains of Pale-tine with the 
corses of the crusaders, stands with lighted and uplifted torch hard hy the side of 
abolitionism, ready to spread conflagration and death around the land''— he declares 



S4 ACTION OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 

We will here close our protracted investigation with a 
brief 
Recapitulation of the action of the Federal Gov- 
ernment in behalf of slavery. 

This action we have found exhibited (omitting constitu- 
tional provisions) in 

1. Its effort to degrade the free people of color by exclu- 
ding them from the militia ; prohibiting them from driving a 
mail waggon — denying naturalization to foreigners of their 
complexion — subjecting them to odious disqualifications and 
restrictions in the City of Washington ; and above all in per- 
mitting them without trial, at the discretion of the marshal, 
to be sold as slaves to pay their jail fees. 

2. In its tolerance of slavery in territories under its exclu- 
sive jurisdiction. 

3. In its arbitrary, unconstitutional, and wicked laws for 
the arrest of fugitive slaves. 

4. In its negotiation with Great Britain and Mexico for 
the surrender of fugitive slaves. 

5. In its invasion of Florida, in pursuit of fugitive slaves. 

6. In its negotiations with Great Britain, for compensation 
for slaves who had taken refuge on board British ships of 



7. In its negotiation with Great Britain, for compensation 
for slaves, ship-wrecked in the West Indies. 

S. In its tolerance, protection, and regulation of the Amer- 
ican slave trade. 

9. In its duplicity, with regard to the abolition of the Afri- 
can slave trade. 

10. In its efforts to prevent the abolition of slavery m Cuba. 

11. In its conduct towards Hayti. 

12. In its conduct towards Texas. 

13. In its attempt to establish a censorship of the press. 

14. In its invasion of the right of petition, and the freedom 
of debate. 

Such has been the action in behalf of human bondage, of 
a Government which, in the language of the Constitution, 

that " bo long a< the Dbmocratic or State Rights' party shall maintain the asci ndaney, 

ibolitionists will be comparatively innoxious:" and he announces 

what will be no less news i<> the New-York merchants, than it is to abolitionists, that 

ir National Hank I'w.tv. believe the Federal Legislature not only have 

ibolish slavery in the District of Columbia, but <iL«> in i : u States." 

From ilio opinious and motives we have ascribed to masses, we know there are many 

. \o mm unity can offer brighter examples af virtue and philanthropy 

than the merchants of New-York; and he who thinks that there are not anions- our 

ultra-democrats, men who conscientiously believe the principle* they profess, and act 

isteacy with them, docs not know them. 



RESPONSIBILITY OF THE FREE STATES. 85 

was formed to establish justice, and secure the blessin &s of 

LIBERTY. 

And by whom are the men composing the Government 
which thus perverts the objects of its institution, invested 
with their power ? They are the agents, the mere instru- 
ments of the people of the United States — of the North and 
the East, as well as of the A Vest and the South. This con- 
sideration calls us to consider 

The Responsibility of the Free States. 

The advocates of slavery and the tools of parly, are con- 
tinually telling us, that u tke North lias nothhg"to do >r/A 
slavery." A volume might be filled with facts, proving the 
fallacy of this assertion. There is scarcely a family among 
us, that is not connected by the ties of friendship, kindred, 
or pecuniary interest, with the land of slaves. That land is 
endeared to us by a thousand recollections — with that land 
we have continual commercial, political, religious, and scfcial 
intercourse. There in innumerable instances, are our per- 
sonal friends, our brothers, our sons and our daughters. — 
How malignant and foolish then is the falsehood, that the 
thousands and tens of thousands of abolitionists amono- us, 
are anxious to see that land reeking in blood ! But the more 
intimate are our connections with that land, the more expo- 
sed are we to be contaminated by its pollutions ; and the 
more imperatively are we bound to seek its real welfare. 

Let it then sink deep in our hearts, let it rest upon our 
consciences, that in every wicked and cruel act of the Fed- 
eral Government in behalf of slavery, the people of the North 
have participated, — we might almost say that for all this 
wickedness and cruelty, they are solely rcsjwnsiulc ; since it 
could not have been perpetrated but with the consent of their 
representatives. Vast and fertile territories, which might 
now have been inhabited by a free and happy population, 
have by northern votes been converted, to use the language 
of the poet, into 

" A land of tyrants, and a don of slaves." 

By northern Senators, have our African slavers been pro- 
tected from the search of British cruisers. By northern rep- 
resentatives, is the American slave trade protected, and the 
abominations enacted in the Capital of the Republic, sanc- 
tioned and perpetuated : and northern men are the officia- 
ting ministers in the sacrifice of constitutional liberty on the 
altar of Moloch. But representatives are only the agents of 
their constituents, speaking their thoughts, and doing their 



8G division of the union. 

will. The people of the North have done " this great 
wickedness." "When they repent, when tlicy love mercy, and 
seek after justice, their representatives will no longer rejoice 
to aid in transforming the image of God into a beast of bur- 
den — then will the human shambles be overthrown in the 
Capital — then will slavers " freighted with despair," no 
longer depart from the port of Alexandria, nor chained cof- 
fles parade the streets of Washington. Then will the powers 
of the Federal Government be exercised in protecting, not 
in annihilating the rights of man ; and then will the slave- 
holder, deprived of the countenance of the free States, as he 
is already of nearly all the rest of the civilized world, be led 
to reflect calmly on the character and tendency of the insti- 
tution he now so dearly prizes, and seek his own welfare and 
that of his children in its voluntary and peaceful abolition. 

But here we are confronted with direful prophecies. Let 
us then proceed to inquire into 

The probable influence of the Anti-slavery agitation 
on the permanency of the union. 

Before we can predict what this influence will be, we must 
first inquire, what will probably be the direction and aim of 
the agitation 1 Every State possesses all the powers of in- 
dependent sovereignty, except such as she has delegated to 
the Federal Government. All the powers not specified in 
the Constitution as delegated, are by that instrument reserv- 
ed. Among the powers specified, that of abrogating the 
slave codes of several States, is not included ; on the con- 
trary, the guarantee of the continuance of the African slave 
trade for twenty years, the provision for the arrest of fugitive 
slaves, and the establishment of the federal ratio of repre- 
sentation, all refer to and acknowledge the existence of slave- 
ry under State authority. , If therefore the abolitionists, un- 
mindful of their solemn and repeated disclaimers of all power 
in Congress to legislate for the abolition of slavery in the 
States, should with unexampled perfidy attempt to bring 
about such legislation ; and if Congress, regardless of their 
oaths, should ever be guilty of the consummate folly and 
wickedness of passing a law emancipating the slaves held 
under State authority, the Union would most unquestionably 
be rent in twain. The South would indeed be craven could 
it submit to such profligate usurpation ; it would be compel- 
led to withdraw, not for the preservation of slavery alone, 
but for the protection of all its rights ; and indeed the liber- 
ties of every State would be jeoparded under a government, 



POWERS AXD DUTY OF CONGRESS. S7 

which, spuming all constitutional restraints, should assume 
the omnipotence of the British Parliament. But it is scarce- 
ly worth while to anticipate the consequence of an act which 
can never be perpetrated Bp long as the people of the North 
retain an ordinary share of honesty and intelligence. 

We have, under all the circumstances of the case, suffi- 
cient reasons for believing- that the anti-davcry of the North, 
will carry its action to the very limits of the Constitution, 
but not beyond them. In despite of all the coalitions of par- 
ties, and the intrigues of politicians, liberty of speech and of 
the press will be maintained, and the discussion of slavery 
will be extended by the very efforts made to arrest it. Let 
us suppose this discussion to be attended with its natural 
and probable result, the conversion of the great mass of the 
northern people to the principles and avowed objects of the 
abolitionists. Of course, those principles and objects will 
be embraced by their representatives in Congress. In this 
case, we may expect that slavery will be abolished in the 
District of Columbia, and that it will be prohibited in the 
territories hereafter to be formed on the west of the Missis- 
sippi. Thus far the constitutional power of Congress cannot 
be rationally questioned. Independent of the exclusive ju- 
risdiction over the territories granted to Congress, we have 
the precedent of the ordinance of 1787, prohibiting slavery 
in the North-west Territory, and the more recent precedent 
of the prohibition of it in the Louisiana territory north of 
3S J degrees of north latitude. The American slave trade is 
now, and has been for upwards of thirty years, prohibited in 
vessels under forty tons burden. It would not be easy to 
show that the Constitution forbids its prohibition in vessels 
over forty tons burden. We may therefore take it for grant- 
ed, that the Senate's coasting trade will be legally abolished. 
Should the land traffic not be also destroyed, it would not 
be for want of disposition, or constitutional power in Con- 
gress, but on account of the extreme difficulty which would 
exist in preventing evasions of the law. 

We have now the sum total of national legislation, which 
on our present supposition, will result from the anti-slavery 
action at the North. Yet we are positively assured that such 
legislation would cause a di<<ohuion of the Union. Now ad- 
mitting the constitutional right, and the moral obligation of 
our national legislators, to pass the laws in question, it would 
be difficult to decide by what code of morals they could be 
excused from the discharge of their duty by the apprehension 
of consequences. If God governs the world, more is to be 



8S MOTIVES FOR A SEPARATION. 

feared from rebellion, than from obedience to his will. If 
his wisdom and goodness are both infinite, his will is and 
must be an infallible standard of expediency. If it be folly 
to barter a single soul for the whole world, would it be wise 
to expose a nation to the wrath of Heaven, for a boon which 
we now hold, and would continue to hold at the pleasure of 
men who are daily threatening to deprive us of it? 

But we have no fears that Con cress will ever find the faith- 
ful discharge of their duty, conflicting with the welfare and 
preservation of the Union. How far selfish and influential 
individuals may succeed in raising up at the South a party 
for secession, it is impossible to predict ; but it is not difficult 
to show that a seperation founded on the legislation we have 
specified, would be most preposterous and disastrous, and 
therefore we may reasonably presume it will not occur. 

Should the South secede, they would do so we may sup- 
pose, for one or more of the following reasons, viz. 

1. To protect their rights from invasion. 

2. To guard and perpetuate the institution of slavery. 

3. To increase their wealth and power. 

The North is the strongest portion of the confederacy ; 
and whenever, unmindful of the federal compact, it wickedly 
and forcibly usurps power to the prejudice of the South, se- 
cession is the only resource left to the latter for the protec- 
tion of its rights. But a disregard to the wishes does not 
necessarily imply a violation of the rights of the South. Not 
one of the measures we have contemplated as the probable 
result of the anti-slavery agitation, encroaches on the consti- 
tutional rights of the South ; and therefore secession, how- 
ever it might be professedly justified, would in fact be prompt- 
ed by other motives than that of self-defence. But so long 
as the Federal Government confines its action against slavery 
within the limits of the Constitution, in what way would se- 
cession tend to guard and perpetuate the institution % 

It is natural that the slaveholders should wish to destroy 
the influence of the abolitionists, and hence they have very 
unjustifiably expressed fears respecting them which they do 
not feel, and circulated calumnies which they do not believe. 
The following admissions reveal the true nature of the ajrpre- 
hensions entertained by the slaveholders. 

Mr. Calhoun, alluding in the Senate to opinions express- 
ed by some of his Southern colleagues, exclaimed : " Do 
they expect the abolitionists will resort to arms, and com- 
menoe a crusade to liberate our slaves by force 1 Is this what « 
they mean when they speak of the attempt to abolish slavo- 



ADMISSIONS OF SLAVEHOLDERS. 89 

ry 1 If so, let me tell our friends of the South who differ 
from us, that the war which the abolitionists wage against us, 
is of a very different character, and far more effective — it is 
waged not against our lives, but our character." 

Mr. Duff Green, the editor of the United States Tele- 
graph, and the great champion of slavery, thus expressed 
himself in his paper. " We are of those who believe the 
South has nothing to fear from a servile war. We do not 
believe that the abolitionists intend, nor could they if they 
would, excite the slaves to insurrection. The danger of this 
is remote. We believe that we have most to fear from the 
organized action upon the consciences and fears of the slave- 
holders themselves ; from the insinuation of their dangerous 
heresies into our schools, our pulpits, and our domestic cir- 
cles. It is only by alarming the consciences of the weak and 
feeble, and diffusing among our people a morbid sensibility 
on the question of slavery, that the abolitionists can accom- 
plish their object."* 

We would now respectfully submit to Mr. Calhoun's con- 
sideration, whether a secession would tend in any way to 
defend the characters of slaveholders from the war he con- 
tends is waged against them ; or fortify their consciences 
against the " dangerous heresies" by which they are assailed ? 

The new slave nation would acquire from her separate 
independence, no new power to darken the understandings, 
or benumb the consciences of her citizens. The freedom of 
the press throughout the whole slave region, is already ex- 
tinguished. Not one single newspaper, from Maryland to 
Florida, dares to raise its voice in favor of immediate eman- 
cipation ; and a southern publication, for expressing views 
unfavorable to slavery, notwithstanding its bitter denuncia- 
tions of abolitionists, was lately taken from a Post-Office in 
Virginia, and in pursuance of the laws of the State, commit- 
ted to the flames by order of the public authorities ; and 
when the laws are silent, lynch clubs are ready to visit with 
infamous and cruel penalties, the man who presumes to ad- 
vocate the inalienable rights of man. What new ramparts 
could the southern confederacy build around their beloved 
institution] What new weapons could they forge against 
freedom of discussion 1 

At the North, the discussion of slavery is now greatly re- 
stricted by political and mercenary considerations ; but such 

* The New-York whig merchants may learn from this candid avowal, that the " bare 
idea" of the abolition excitement does not make every " husband and father shudder 
with horror" at the South, whatever it may do in Wall-street. 



90 CONSEQUENCES OF A SEPARATION. 

considerations would be dissipated in a moment by seces- 
sion. The very demagogues who are fawning upon the 
slaveholders for their votes, would, when they had no longer 
votes to bestow, seek popularity in ultra hatred to slavery. 

The anti-slavery agitation at the North, is at present chiefly 
confined to the religious portion of the community ; it would 
then extend to all classes, and be embittered by national ani- 
mosity. Slavery would appear more odious and detestable 
than ever, after having destroyed the fair fabric of American 
Union, and severed the bonds of kindred and of friendship, 
to rivet more firmly the fetters of the bondman. 

The slaveholders are now our fellow-countrymen and cit- 
izens : they would then be foreigners who had discarded our 
friendship and connection, that they might trample with more 
unrestrained violence upon the rights and liberties of their 
fellow-men. These considerations show that any expecta- 
tion of extinguishing or weakening the anti-slavery feeling 
at the North by separation, must be utterly futile. 

A separation would moreover deprive the institution of 
the protection of the Federal Government. Should the 
slaves attempt to revolt, the masters would be left to strug- 
gle with them, unaided by the fleets and armies of the whole 
Republic. 

And by what power would the master recapture his fugi- 
tive who had crossed the boundary of the new empire ? Now 
he may hunt him through the whole confederacy, nor is the 
trembling wretch secure of his liberty, till he beholds the 
British standard waving above him. Then freedom would 
be the boon of every slave who could swim the Ohio, or reach 
the frontier line of the free republic. And this frontier line 
be it remembered, would he cont'un/alhj advancing Smith. — 
The anti-slavery feelings of the North, aggravated as they 
would be by the secession, would afford every possible facil- 
ity to the fugitive, and laws would then be passed, not for 
the restoration of human property, but for the protection of 
human rights. 

Would the dissolution of the Union afford the southern 
planters a more unrestricted enjoyment of the foreign or do- 
mestic slave trade ] Alas ! from the moment of sepaiation, 
slave trading becomes PIRACY in fact, as well as in name, and 
the crews of New-Orleans and Alexandria, as well as of Af- 
rican slavers, would swing on northern gibbets. 

We confess then our utter inability to perceive in what 
possible mode, a secession of the southern States would tend 
to guard and perpetuate the institution of slavery. 



CONSEQUENCES OF A SEPARATION. 91 

Would a dissolution of the Union augment the power and 
wealth of the slave States 1 The power and wealth of a na- 
tion depend on its population, industry, and commerce. The 
increase off the white population at the South is now small, 
compared with the wonderful tide of life which is rolling 
over the western plains. And when the southern region shall 
be insulated from the sympathies of the whole civilized world, 
and consecrated to a stern and remorseless despotism, — a 
despotism sooner or later to be engulphed in blood, by what 
attraction will it divert the tide of emigration from the fair 
prairies of the west, to its own sugar and cotton fields 1 If 
even now, armed patroles must traverse at night the streets 
and highways that the whites may sleep in safety, and mili- 
tary preparation is essential to domestic security,* what hus- 
band or father will take up his residence in the new empire 
when withdrawn from the protection of the Federal Govern- 
ment, and the friendship of its neighbors ? The^ slaves are 
now rapidly gaining upon their masters, and will increase in 
a still greater ratio after the separation, since the prudent 
and the enterprising will abandon the doomed region, and 
few or none will enter it from without. Hence it is obvious 
that the white population could gain no accession from the 
erection of the Southern States into a separate confederacy. 

Would secession augment the wealth of the South ] Be 
it remembered that there is now no one restriction on south- 
ern industry and enterprise which separation would remove. 
The slaveholders in Congress with rare exceptions, have 
conducted the affairs of the nation to suit themselves. So 
far as the interests of the northern manufacturer were iden- 
tified with the tariff, they have been sacrificed at the mandate 
of the cotton grower ; and so far as national legislation can 
promote the wealth of the South, the statutes are already 
enacted. 

It will not be denied that the larger portion of the strength 
of the Union — population, money, commerce, and shipping 
is to be found at the North. In all these elements of national 
power, the South participates equally with the North. The 
foreign invader is kept from her shores, and her property 
abroad is protected from spoliation at least as much by the 
power of the North, as by her own. Her strength for all 
purposes of defence, is the strength of the Union. What 

* " A state of military preparation must always be with us a state of perfect domes- 
tic security. A profound peace, and consequent apathy, may expose us to the danger 
of domestic insurrection." — Message of Gov. Hayne to the Legislature of South Car- 
olina, 1833. 



92 CONSEQUENCES OF A SFPARATION. 

would it be after secession 1 True it is, the South would 
receive Texas into her arms, but she would derive neither 
honor nor power from the loathsome embrace. ' Annexation 
now would ensure to her the political dominion of the whole 
Republic, but after secession, would cause rather weakness 
than strength. 

As we can discover no possible advantage which the South 
could derive from secession, we are convinced that the threats 
of dissolving the Union, which her statesmen are so prodigal 
in scattering, are the ebullitions of passion, or the devices of 
policy, rather than the result of mature determination. This 
conviction is strengthened by still further considerations. 

Should the slave States withdraw without any aggression 
on their rights, but for the sole purpose of enjoying in great- 
er privacy and tranquility the sweets of slavery, they would 
leave the whole North in a state of high exasperation. The 
ligaments which have so long bound us together, cannot be 
ruthlessly and wantonly torn asunder, without causing deep 
and festering wounds, the consequences of which, the ima- 
gination revolts from anticipating. And in what light would 
the dark and gloomy despotism be viewed by the civilized 
world % Mankind would behold, and wonder, and despise. 
The new State would be excluded from the companionship 
of nations. Her cotton would indeed be still purchased, as 
we buy the coffee of Hayti ; but with the least possible inti- 
macy. Already is our Minister at London treated with con- 
tumely, because he is a slaveholder — as the representative 
only of the men who had shattered the American republic to 
secure the permanency of human bondage, he would not be 
endured at any court in Europe with the exception of Con- 
stantinople. In a few years, the slaves would attain a fright- 
ful numerical superiority over their masters. The dread of 
insurrection within, and of aggression from without, would 
realize the prediction of holy writ, when men's hearts shall 
fail them for fear, and for looking after those things which 
are coming on the earth. At length the fatal period would 
arrive, when, stung with insults and injuries, the new empire 
would appeal to arms ; and should a hostile army land upon 
its shores, the standard of emancipation would be reared, 
and slavery would expire in blood. 

We well know with what indignant feelings these pages 
will at first be read by many ; and fortunate shall we deem 
ourselves should we escape the imputation of writing to pro- 
mote insurrection and disunion. But we appeal from the 
decision of angry passion to that of calm reflection. Do we 



CONSEQUENCES OF A SEPARATION. 93 

not speak the words of truth and soberness % Do not the 
signs of the times warrant our predictions 1 In what resj:>ect 
do the sentiments we have uttered conflict with the lessons 
of history, or the character of human nature ? Do we love 
the union of the States 1 (!) If such a love can descend by 
inheritance, we should possess it ; if it can be founded on 
the most thorough conviction of the importance of union not 
merely to the prosperity of our country, but to the happi- 
ness of numerous and beloved children and relatives, we 
should possess it. If the history of the States of Greece, of 
Italy, of Holland, of Germany, of South America, and of our 
own land, demonstrates the blessings of union, and the ca- 
lamities of separation; then should the prayer of every 
American ascend to Heaven for the perpetuity of the Amer- 
ican Union. But let it be a union for the preservation, not 
the destruction of liberty : a union cemented by a sacred 
observance of the constitutional compact ; not enforced by 
gag laws, a censorship of the press, and the abrogation of 
the right of petition — a union in conformity with the will of 
God, not in contempt of his authority — a union that shall 
be regarded as a common blessing, not held as a boon from 
the South, ever ready to be withdrawn as a penalty for the 
discharge of moral and political duties. 

May Almighty God in mercy preserve the friends of eman- 
cipation, from the sin and folly of even hazarding the Union, 
by the slightest encroachment on the constitutional rights of 
the South, and may He give them grace to maintain their 
own rights in defiance of every menace. 



APPENDIX. 



THE A MIST AD CASE. 



In the month of July, 1839, the Spanish schooner Amis- 
tad, Ramen Ferrer, master, sailed from ■ Havana for Porto 
Principe, a place in the island of Cuba, about 100 leagues 
distant, having on board as passengers, Don Pedro Montes, 
and Jose Ruiz, with 54 fresh African negroes, just brought 
from Lemboko, as slaves. After being out four days, the 
neoroes rose in the night, killed the captain and cook, and 
took possession of the vessel. The two sailors took the boat 
and went on shore, and Montes was required, on pain of 
death, to navigate the vessel to Africa. He steered east- 
wardly in the day time, but put about at night, and thus kept 
near the American coast, until the 26th of August, when they 
were taken by Lieut. Gedney, United States Navy, and car- 
ried into New-London. Judge Judson, of the United States 
Court, was sent for, and after a short examination of the two 
Spaniards, and a Creole cabin boy, without a word of com- 
munication with the negroes, the latter were bound over for 
trial as pirates, although their utter ignorance of any Euro- 
pean language, and the admission of Ruiz himself showed 
that they were fresh Africans, and of course could not be 
slaves by the laws of Spain. At this time, it was the united 
voice of the public press and of public men, that as a matter 
of course, they would either be tried and executed here, or 
delivered up to the Spaniards. 

The abolitionists saw that these men had only exercised 
the natural right of self-defence, justified by all laws, and 
that justice to these strangers, and a regard for the honor of 
law itself, required a vigorous effort to turn the tide of public 
opinion and judicial prejudice. Messrs. S. S. Jocelyn, J. Lea- 
vitt, and Lewis Tappan, were appointed a committee to take 
charge of the case, who immediately engaged as counsel, 
Seth P. Staples and Theodore Sedgwick, Esqrs., of New- 
York, and R. S. Baldwin, of New- J Liven. Cur hands were 
strengthened by a letter from Mr. Adams, which was pub- 
lished in the newspapers, asserting the right of the negroes 
to act as they did, and declaring that the vessel and its con- 
tents were theirs by the law of nations. 



APPENDIX. 95 

On the 6th of September, M. Cakleron cle la Barca, the 
Spanish Minister, demanded the immediate delivery of the 
schooner and cargo to Ruiz and Montes, under the treaty, 
and that " the negroes be sent to be tried by the proper tri- 
bunal" in Cuba. He thus establishes the distinction between 
the "negroes" and the "cargo." He urges as reasons why 
the negroes should be given up, "the law of nations in a 
case analagous," and also that "the crime in question is one 
of those, which, if permitted to pass unpunished, would en- 
danger the internal tranquility and safety of the island of 
Cuba, where the citizens of the United States not only carry 
on a considerable trade, but where they possess territorial 
properties which they cultivate with the labor of African 
slaves ;" and further, that if the negroes " should be con- 
demned by the incompetent tribunal that has taken upon it- 
self to try them as pirates and assassins, the infliction of 
capital punishment here would not be attended with the sa- 
lutary effects," and " the satisfaction due to the public mind 
would not be accorded." And as a further inducement, he 
promises that his Government "would immediately accord 
the extradition of any slaves that might take refuge there 
from the southern States." 

On the 5th of September, the United States Attorney for 
the District of Connecticut, W. S. Holabird, Esq., wrote to 
Mr. Forsyth, the Secretary of State, apprising him that 
" the Marshal of this District has in his custody the Spanish 
schooner Amistad, with her cargo and 41 Hacks, supposed 
to be slaves." The blacks " are now in jail at New Haven," 
and " the schooner and cargo have been libelled by Lieut. 
Gedney" for salvage. Here again is the distinction between 
the "cargo" and the "blacks." He says' also, "the next 
term of our Circuit Court sits on the 17th instant, at which 
time I suppose it will be iny duty to bring them to trial, 
unless they are in some other u-ay disposed of." To this Mr. 
Forsyth replies, Sept. 11, that the Spanish Minister has 
claimed the "vessel, cargo, and blacks on board, as Spanish 
property," and directing Mr. Attorney to " take care that no 
proceeding of your Circuit Court, or of any other judicial tri- 
bunal, places the vessel, cargo, or slaves beyond the control 
of the Federal Executive." M. Cakleron had not demand- 
ed the "blacks" as "property" at all, but as criminals ; and 
his successor, M. Argaiz, Nov. 2G, says his complaint is that 
"the public vengeance has not been satisfied, for be it recol- 
lected that the legation of Spain does not demand the delivery 
of slaves, hut of assassins." In the face of this declaration 



96 APPENDIX. 

of the legation, Mr. Forsyth instructs Mr. Holabird that the 
blacks are claimed as "property," and the whole proceeding 
of our Government is based upon this false assumption. 

On the 9th Sept., Mr. Holabird writes to Mr. Forsyth tliat 
he thinks the United States Courts have no jurisdiction over 
the alleged crime, as it was committed on board a Spanish 
vessel on the high seas, and he eagerly asks " whether there 
are no treaty stipulations with the Government of Spain that 
would authorize our Government to deliver them up to the 
Spanish authorities ; and if so, whether it could be done be- 
fore our Court sits V*. The Executive, however, dared not 
take the responsibility of sending these MEN beyond seas 
by a mere order, without warrant or form of law. 

Mr. Holabird writes again, Sept. 21, to Mr. Forsyth, that 
" with a view of carrying out your instructions," that is, to 
prevent " any other judicial tribunal" from placing the ne- 
groes "beyond the control of the Federal Executive," he 
had " filed a libel in the District Court, against the negroes, 
in behalf of the United States, averring" that they had been 
claimed by the Spanish Government as 'property, and also 
that they had been " imported in violation of the law of 1819" 
prohibiting the slave trade, and praying the Court to "decree 
that the Marshal hold them subject to the order of the Fed- 
eral Executive on the one claim or the other." The Circuit 
Court instructed the Grand Jury that they had no jurisdic- 
tion over the alleged crime. The Committee then caused a 
writ of habeas corpus to be issued from the Circuit Court, to 
know by what authority the negroes were detained by the 
Marshal, but Judge Thompson, after full argument, decided 
that, since these persons had been libelled as property, the 
question of their right to liberty could not be examined on 
liaheas corpus — thus subjecting the Common Law and habeas 
corpus to the paramount authority of the Civil Law in Ad- 
miralty process, on a claim of human beings as property — 
a virtual prostration of the great bulwark of personal liberty, 
the habeas corpus. 

The hearing of the case in the District Court was adjourn- 
ed to the November term, and afterwards to January. On 
the 5th Nov., Mr. Holabird again writes to Mr. Forsyth that 
" if there is any action to be had on the part of our Govern- 
ment, with reference to the blacks, it is important that we 
be informed, cither officially or unofficially, before the session 
of the court." And again, Nov. 14, asking leave to employ 
assistant counsel because " my health is feeble, and if the 
matter is not disposed of' by the 'Executive before our Court sits, 



APPENDIX. . 97 

much is to be clone." This proves beyond a doubt that there 
were all the while negotiations and consultations going on, 
" officially or unofficially," to see. if some method could not 
be hit upon to put these negroes in the power of their ene- 
mies, and satisfy " public vengeance" at Cuba, without wait- 
ing the slow and uncertain movements of the courts of law. 
But the risk was too great of thus openly assuming the forms 
as well as powers of despotism. This is surprising too, in- 
asmuch as the Attorney General of the United States, Hon. 
Felix Grundy, had advised in the first stage of the proceed- 
ings, that the negroes were a part of the cargo, and that the 
proper mode of proceeding " would be for the President of 
the United States to issue his order, J i reefed to the Marshal, 
in whose custody the vessel and cargo are, to deliver the 
same" including the negroes, to the order of the Spanish 
Minister ; and M. Argaiz says, Dec. 25, this opinion " was 
confidentially communicated to him at the Department of 
State on th#- 19th of November," and " he was assured had 
been adopted by the Cabinet." 

In the mean time, the Vigilant Committee on behalf of the 
negroes, had Messrs. Ruiz and Montes arrested in New York, 
on a civil suit for assault and false imprisonment on the high 
seas. This brought out a bitter complaint from M. Argaiz, 
Oct. 22, which was answered by Mr. Forsyth instructing the 
United States Attorney for New York, B.*F. Butler, to'offer 
them his " advice and aid if necessary, as to any measure 
which it may be proper for them to take to obtain their re- 
lease, and indemnity" for their arrest. Mr. Butler very pro- 
perly advised them that the only way to get out of prison 
was to give bail, but Ruiz declined to give bail, " for rea- 
sons of state," as he himself said in a note in the newspapers, 
or as Mr. Butler informs Mr. Forsyth, November 18th, 
"under the hope that his deliverance might be effected 
through the intervention of the Government of the United 
States," but finding this could not be done, bail was finally 
given. The suit, however, was never brought to trial. The 
transaction, however, exhibited the spirit of the Executive. 
M. Argaiz writes to Mr. Forsyth, Dec. 25, " The undersign- 
ed would not have troubled the Government of the Union 
with his urgent demands, if the two Spaniards (who as the 
Secretary of State, in his note of the 12th, says ' were found 
in this distressing and perilous situation by officers of the 
United States, who moved by sympathetic feelings which sub- 
sequently became national') had not been the victims of an 
intrigue, as accurately shown by Mr. Forsyth, in the confer- 



98 . APPENDIX. 

ence which he had with the undersigned on the 21st of Oc- 
tober last." And Mr. Forsyth, in the letter above referred, 
to, Dec. 12, assures M. Argaiz that " with the single excep- 
tion of the vexatious detention to which Messrs. Ruiz and 
Montes had been subjected in consequence of the civil suit 
instituted against them, all the proccediw gs in the matter, on 
the part both of the executive and judicial branches of the 
matter, have had their foundation in the assumption that those 
persons alone were the parties aggrieved, and that their claim 
to the surrender of the irropertij was founded in fact and in 
justice." 

All this, however, does not satisfy the Spanish Minister, 
who had claimed, Nov. 26, that it was the duty of the Gov- 
ernment to have acted " gubcrnativamentc" by Executive 
mandate; and declared that it " must be the opinion of the 
Cabinet," that the Government possessed already " the ne- 
cessary powers to act gabcrnativainentc" and " without await- 
ing the decision of any court." And he demands such action 
as a proper "proof of the scrupulousness and respect with 
which this nation fulfills treaties ;" and he threatens that "if, 
contrary to this hope, the decision should not be as the under- 
signed asks, he can only declare the General Government of 
the Union responsible for all and every consequence which 
the delay may produce." No rebuke was returned for this 
insolence, but when, afterwards, Jan. 20, 1841, the British 
Ambassador, Mr. Fox, in obedience to the orders of his Gov- 
ernment, wrote to Mr. Forsyth, courteously expressing his 
" hope" that the President would " find himself empowered 
to take such measures for the Africans as shall secure to 
them their liberty, to which, without doubt they are by law- 
entitled," the Secretary tartly replies, that the communica- 
tion is received " as an evidence of the benevolence of Her 
Majesty's Government — under which uspe.Gt alone it could be 
entertained by the Government of the United States." 

In his letter of Dec. 12, Mr. Forsyth had assured M. Ar- 
gaiz that while the delays and proceedings in the courts were 
"beyond the control of this Department," at the same time 
"it is not apprehended that thoj will affect the course which 
the Government of the United States may think fit ultimate- 
ly to adopt." What this hint was designed to assure M. 
Argaiz of, we could probably better understand if we had 
minutes of the " confidential" conversations so often referred 
to in the correspondence. As it is, we can only infer what 
was meant, from what was done. Dec. 30, M. Argaiz writes 
to Mr. Forsyth, referring to " a conversation which I had 



APPENDIX. 99 

With you on the morning of the clay before yesterday," in 
which " you mentioned the possibility that the Court of Con- 
necticut might, at its meeting on the 7th of January next, 
declare itself incompetent, or order the restitution of the 
schooner Amistad, with her cargo, and the negroes found on 
board of her;" and saying that as " these negroes have de- 
clared before the Court of Connecticut, that they are not 
slaves, and that the best means of testing the truth of their 
allegation is to bring them before the courts of Havana," and 
he is " at the same time desirous to free the Government of 
the United States from the trouble of keeping said negroes 
in prison;" he asks as a final and " most particular favor," 
that our Government would place the negroes " at the dis- 
posal of the Captain General of the Island of Cuba, by 
transporting them thither in a ship belonging to the United 
States." 

On the 6th of Jan. 1S40, Mr. Forsyth replies, that he is 
instructed by the President to state that " in the event of the 
decision of the Circuit Court of Connecticut being such as 
is anticipated," he will " cause the necessary orders to be 
given for a vessel of the United States to be held in readi- 
ness to receive the negroes and convey them to Cuba;" and 
that " the President has the more readily acceded" to the 
request, that the negroes "may have an opportunity of prov- 
ing the truth of their allegation" that they are not slaves, 
" before the proper tribunals of the island." A most benev- 
olent motive for sending persons out of the country ! 

On the same day, Mr. Forsyth wrote to Mr. Holabird that 
" the President has, agreeably to yowr Mtgges&m, taken in 
connection with the request of the Spanish Minister, ordered 
a vessel to be in readiness to receive the negroes," as " the 
presumption is that the court? will decree" that "they are to 
remain in the custody of the Marshal to be delivered over" 
— and requiring him to have all the documents "ready to be 
handed over to the commander." The requisition upon the 
Navy Department is dated Jan. 2, and requires the vessel 
" to be ordered to anchor off the port of New-Haven," not in 
the harbor, " as early as the 10th of January," and there 
await, her final instructions. The Grampus, 'Lieut. Paine, 
sailed under sealed orders from the Navy-Yard at Brooklyn. 
By letter of Jan. 7, Lieut. Paine was 'directed to " place 
himself in communication" with Mr. Holabird, that "he may- 
receive the earliest biformation of the decision of the court." 
All this, and many other circumstances, evidently point to 
an understanding among the parties with regard to " the 



100 APPENDIX. 

course which the Government" was now " ultimately to 
adopt." No letter of Mr. Holabird containing the " sugges- 
tion" about sending the negroes away in a national vessel, 
appears among the printed documents, and it must therefore 
have been made in the course of that " confidential" inter- 
course, carried on " officially or unofficially," which is so 
often alluded to. The friends of the Africans were not in- 
sensible to the danger of some secret and sudden movement, 
and therefore took the best measures in their power, by 
sleepless vigilance, and by providing fleet horses at hand, to 
baffle anv such design. That these fears were not ground- 
less, will be seen by a letter from Mr. Holabird to Mr. For- 
syth, written Jan. 11, during the progress of the trial at New- 
Haven, in which he points out an error in " the Executive 
warrant to the Marshal of this District for the delivery of the 
negroes of the Amistad," in using the term " Circuit Court" 
for " District Court." He says, " should the pretended friends 
of the negroes obtain a writ of habeas corpus, the Marshal 
could not justify under that warrant." And he proceeds, 
" The Marshal wishes me to inquire whether, in the event 
of a decree by the court requiring him to release the negroes, 
or in case of an appeal by the adverse party, it is expected 
the Executive warrant will be executed V What expecta- 
tion does this point to ? This was despatched by an express 
messenger, with such haste, lest perchance this clerical blun- 
der should defeat the designs of the Government, that the 
reply of Mr. Forsyth is dated the following day, and correct- 
ing the mistake, and instructing him, u by direction of the 
President, that, if the decision of the court is such as is anti- 
cipated, the order of the President is to be carried into exe- 
cution, unless an appeal shall actually have been interposed. 
You are not to take it for granted that it will be interposed." 
This is a plain intimation that it was intended to hurry the 
negroes out of the jurisdiction of the court on the instant the 
expected decision of the court should be given. The fol- 
lowing is the " Executive Order," which Mr. Van Buren 
should have always before his eyes, and posterity should 
cause it to be graven on his tomb, to rot only with his mem- 
ory. 

" The Marshal of the United States for the District of 
Connecticut, will deliver over to Lieut. John J. Paine, of 
the United States Navy, and aid in conveying on board the 
schooner Grampus, under his command, all the negroes, late 
of the Spanish schooner Amistad, in his custody, under pro- 
cess now pending before the Circuit Court of the United 



APPENDIX. 101 

States for the District of Connecticut. For so doing this 
order will be his warrant. 

" Given under toy hand, at the city of Washington, this 
7th day of January, A. D. 1S40. "Mi VAN BUREN. 

•* By the President : 

" John Forsyth, Secretary of State.'' 

The unexpected decision of Judge Judson in favor of the 
Hegroes, declaring them to be manifestly fresh from Africa, 
and so entitled to their liberty even under the laws of Spain, 
defeated all these plans, and drove the Government to the 
necessity of appealing lo the Supreme Court of the United 
States for a final decision, and of supporting this large com- 
pany in custody at a vast expense, not yet publicly ascer- 
tained, all which was cheerfully undertaken, rather than yield 
to the demands of justice and mercy to the strangers. The 
Committee took the best methods in their power to give these 
benighted heathen such instruction as they were capable of 
receiving ; and the most thorough preparations were made 
for the final trial, which took place at Washington, at the 
term of the Supreme Court for January, 1841. By the bless- 
ing of Heaven upon the efforts of the counsel, Mr. Baldwin, 
and the venerable John Quincy Adams, aided by the light 
thrown upon the public mind, the Supreme Court confirmed 
the decision of the lower tribunal, so far as to declare the 
negroes perfectly FREE. " Thy prey hath escaped thee !' ; 

In the following autumn, so many as survived were sent, 
by public charity, to Sierra Leone, on the coast of Africa, 
and within a moderate distance of their own homes. Laus 
Deo. 

THE CREOLE CASE. 

On the 27th of October, 1841, the brig Creole, of Rieh- 
mond, a regular slaver in the American slave trade, sailed 
from Hampton Roads for New-Orleans. ' ; with a cargo of 
slaves and tobacco," the slaves about 135 in number. On 
Sunday evening, Nov. 7, the captain hove to, expecting to 
make Abaco reef next mornincr. About 9 o'clock 1\ M., a 
rising took place of a part of the slaves, who soon obtained 
complete possession of the vessel, having in the struggle 
wounded the captain and killed a man named Ilewell. They 
retained the possession, and compelled a passenger named 
Merritt to navigate them to Nassau, where she arrived, in 
possession of the negroes, on the 9th. The American Con- 
sul, John F. Bacon, immediately went on board, and placed 



102 APPENDIX. 

the passenger named Merritt in command, ordering him to 
keep the American colors set. He also applied to the Gov- 
ernor for an armed force to prevent any of the " slaves" from 
landing "until further investigations can be made." In 
compliance with this request, an officer with 20 black troops 
was sent on board the vessel, and an official notification sent 
to the Consul, 1. That the courts of the island had no juris- 
diction of the alleged offences, and 2. That inasmuch as it 
was charged that the crime of murder had been committed 
on the high seas, an examination would be had and all par- 
ties that should appear to be implicated in the crime " should 
be detained here until reference could be made to the Sec- 
retary of State," in England, to decide whether they could 
be delivered over to the American Government. The ex- 
amination was not concluded until Friday, about 12 o'clock, 
when the mate in command said he had no more witnesses 
to produce, and 19 of the negroes, being all that were iden- 
tified as having taken any part in the capture or control of 
the vessel, were sent on shore as prisoners, the guard of 
troops withdrawn, and the rest of the negroes told that they 
were no longer under restraint, but were free to go ashore, 
or where they pleased. The Attorney General of the island 
says that the mate, Gifford, informed him that " it was not 
his desire to detain on board of his vessel one of the persons 
(shipped as slaves) who did not wish to remain, and that they 
had his free permission to quit here, if they thought proper 
to do so ; but that he was apprehensive the persons in the 
surrounding boats" (a large number of which were in the 
neighborhood, to convey and welcome the strangers to the 
shore) " would, as soon as the military were withdrawn, board 
his vessel and commit acts of robbery and other violence." 
To this, Mr. Attorney replied, as he says, that he " had no 
instructions to interfere" between him and "the persons" 
called slaves, and that as to the people in the boats, "pre- 
cautions had been taken against" violence, and " he might 
rely upon being protected by the authorities against any vio- 
lations of the law." He declares that the departure of the 
negroes from the Creole " was their own free and voluntary 
act, sanctioned by the express consent of the mate, and that 
neither myself nor any other of the authorities of the colony 
then on board interfered in the slightest manner to induce 
them to take that step." All the colored persons immedi- 
ately rushed into the boats and went ashore, except four or 
five of the women. On the ISth, a vessel sailed for Jamaica, 
with 50 passengers, the greater part being of those who 



AITEXDIX. 103 

landed from the Creole, and on the 19th, the Creole sailed 
for New-Orleans, where she arrived Dec. 2d. 

The American Consul protested to the Governor against 
the proceedings by which the negroes had been allowed to 
go ashore. The ground of his complaint is thus stated : 

" These slaves, as I view the case, while they were under 
the American flag, and regularly cleared from one slavehold- 
ing State to another, within the United States, were as much 
a portion of the cargo of the said brig, as the tobacco and 
other articles onboard; and whether on the high seas, or 
in an English port, does not change their character ; and that 
her Majesty's Government had not the right to interfere with 
or control the officers of an American vessel, so circumstan- 
ced, in such a course as might be necessary and proper to 
secure sucli propert ij from being lost to the owners." 

This is the American claim, then, that the condition of 
slavery, which was fixed upon these persons in Virginia re- 
mained so attached to them in a British port, that their mas- 
ter or owner had a right to demand the aid of British author- 
ities to re-establish his authority, and then a right to use, in 
such British port, any means, of force or fraud, necessary to 
**, secure such property" from the peculiar perils of these 
waters. 

That both force and fraud were planned by the Americans, 
and prevented by the British authorities, is plain from the 
documents. Capt. W. Wooclside, of Brunswick, Maine, 
master of the bark Louisa, then at Nassau, deposes that on 
the 13th, at the time the Creole was surrounded by boats 
with colored persons, none of whom were allowed to come 
on board until the 19 prisoners were secured, " that at about 
12 o'clock a boat with rive white men came along side, and 
were ordered off, though this deponent informed the officers 
that they had been sent by the American Consul to suppih) 
the place of those on shore." The Consul, in his letter to 
Mr. Webster, says, " I was informed by respectable persons 
that an attempt would be made to liberate the slaves by 
force." The mate also informed him that " the crew were 
greatly intimidated," and in consequence of this, " a mate 
and four American seamen volunteered to go on board, and 
proceeded to the brig at my request." This was the aspect 
of the transaction officially presented to the American Gov- 
ernment, and used by it as the basis of an application to the 
British Government for redress and indemnity. But it so 
happened that the canro of slaves was insured, and in the 
policy there was a guaranty by the insured against mutiny 



104 APPENDIX. 

of the slaves. For the purpose therefore, of exonerating 
the vessel, and of charging the insurers, as well as to secure 
the freight on the lost cargo, another pretext was made, at 
New-Orleans, by Gifford, as acting master, and the crew and 
passengers, which tells the whole story about the " live white 
men," sent by the American Consul, " to supply the place 
of those on shore," and shows the nature of the " interfer- 
ence" which was afterwards the ground of complaint. 

[See Senate Documents, 27th Congress, 2d Session, No. 
51, pp. 44, 45.] 

By reference to the above document it will be seen that 
it was the not making a distinction between the boats that 
hovered around the Creole at the moment of closing the 
examination — the not keeping oft' the blacks and letting on 
the whites, the refusal to countenance and aid this CON- 
SPIRACY, which constitutes the head and front of the " in- 
terference" by the British authorities. After the negroes 
were landed, the Attorney General sent to the brig for the 
baggage of the " passengers," which was finally taken by an 
officer of the customs, the mate protesting that both the ne- 
groes and their clothing were the property of their masters. 
The captain then wished to sell some of his provisions, and 
was told that he might, if he would enter his vessel at the 
Custom-House, and enter the negroes as passengers, which 
he declined ! 

The news reached Washington on the 15th December, and 
produced the greatest excitement in Congress. On the 2:Jd 
the case was brought forward in the Senate, by Mr. Barrow, 
in connection with a memorial of the owners of the Henue- 
za, a slaver that was shipwrecked the year before, and the 
slaveo carried to Nassau and allowed to enjoy their liberty. 
It was debated by Messrs. Barrow, Calhoun, King, Preston 
and Rives, all slaveholders, not one northern Senator saying 
a word ! Mr. King said, " If such outrages continue, noth- 
ing could prevent a collision ; and unless the British Gov- 
ernment should retrace her steps, war must inevitably ensue." 
Mr. Calhoun hoped the citizens would " know what protec- 
tion this Government could extend to their property, and if. 
we cannot obtain justice, every man with an American heart 
will be ready to raise his hand against oppression." Mr. 
Preston " did not consider it a case of war." He said, " the 
British (lovcrnment had fallen into new hands, and there 
was some reason to believe that the new Ministry would re- 
verso the former decision respecting the seizure of slaves." 
Mr. Barrow said, " the people of the South would not sub- 



APPENDIX. 105 

mit to British interpretation of the laws of nations, making 
a distinction between slaves and goods ;" and that " if these 
contemptible British subjects at Nassau are permitted to go 
on in this way, seizing by force of arms and liberating slaves 
belonging to American citizens, the South would be com- 
pelled to fit out an armament and destroy those towns." JVTf. 
Hives " was opposed to this premature discussion." Tho 
voice of the Senate had been given by " the unanimous vote 
on the resolutions respecting the case of the Enterprise." 
These gentlemen did not advert to the fact that it is not 
British policy that creates the difficulty, but the British law, 
and that for England to retrace her steps in this matter, she 
must first destroy her Constitution. And yet it goes out un- 
contradicted, that unless she emasculate the habeas corpus, 
we will wane war against her. 

On the 10th of January, the subject was brought up again, 
by Mr. Calhoun, who offered a resolution calling upon the 
President for information respecting the Creole, " the mur- 
dering of a passenger, the wounding of the captain and 
mate by the slaves on board, and the occurrences afterwards," 
&:c, with his opinion as to what ought to be done to " redress 
the wrong; done to the American flag." No northern Sena- 
tor had a suggestion to make. 

The neMt day, when the resolution came up regularly for 
consideration, the Senate was thrown into a paroxysm, by a 
motion of Mr. Porter, of Michigan, to substitute the word 
" persons" for " slaves" as more conformable to the Consti- 
tution. Calhoun, in a tone of imperiousness, demanded the 
object of the motion. It could be with no other object than 
to deny the rights of the South in regard to their slaves, and 
he should like to know if there was more than one man on 
that floor who held such views. Archer, and Berrien, and 
King, and Preston followed, in the same strain. Preston 
denied that slaves were persons, in any sense ; they were 
property, and to be treated as property, and he regretted 
that the fathers of the Constitution had been so fastidious in 
avoiding the term slaves. Porter remained firm, and mar- 
velled at the sudden discovery that the language of the Con- 
stitution was a firebrand ; but finally, seeing himself sup- 
ported by not a single northern Senator, he unfortunately 
yielded to the entreaties of his venerable colleague, Gover- 
nor Woodbridge, and Withdrew his motion. So the resolu- 
tion was adopted, unanimously. 

The President replied, Jan. 20, communicating the docu- 
ments received, and saying that the Secretary of State was 



106 



APPENDIX. 



to prepare a despatch to our Minister at London " without 
delay." Some remarks were again made by the slavehold- 
ers, no northern Senator saying a word. On the 18th of 
Feb., the subject was again introduced, by the slaveholders, 
in connection with the claims on Mexico, no northern Sena- 
tor offering a word. On the of Feb., Mr. Walker, of 

Mississippi, moved another resolution of inquiry, which was 
adopted, no northern Senator saying a word. The President, 
in reply, communicated Mr. Webster's letter of instructions 
to Mr. Everett, our Minister at London, concerning this 
case. This letter was read, and called forth the most ecsta- 
tic eulogiums from the slaveholding Senators, no northern 
Senator saying a word ! 

Mr. Webster's letter next requires to be considered. It 
bears date Jan. 29, 1842, and after a brief recital of the facts, 
says, " The British Government cannot but see that this 
case, as presented in these papers, is one calling loudly for 
redress." He says, the slaves are " recognized as property 
by the Constitution of the United States in those States in 
which slavery exists." It would be difficult for Mr. Web- 
ster to substantiate this assertion. He says it was "the 
plain and obvious duty of the authorities at Nassau" to assist 
the Consul " in putting an end to the captivity of the master 
and crew," [a full admission that they were brought to Nas- 
sau in " captivity" to their masters, the negroes,] which they 
did — "restoring to them the control of the vessel," which 
they did — " and enabling them to resume their voyage," — 
which they did — " and to take the mutineers and murderers 
to their own country, to answer for their crimes before the 
proper tribunal." This last they did not do, and our own 
Government had just set an example in the case of the Amis- 
tad " mutineers and murderers." Where, then, is the com- 
plaint ? However, Mr. Webster says, " if the facts turn out 
as stated," in the papers sent, " this (government thinks it a 
clear case for indemnification," on the ground that the au- 
thorities " did actually interfere to set free the slaves, and to 
enable them to disperse themselves beyond the reach of 
their owners." We have seen exactly what this interfer- 
ence was. But Mr. Webster asks, " What right had the 
British authorities to inquire into the cargo of the vessel, or 
the condition of the persons on board] These persons 
might be slaves for life; they might be slaves for a term of 
years, under a system of apprenticeship J they might be 
bound to service by their own voluntary act; they might be 
in confinement for crimes committed ; they might be prison- 



APPENDIX. 107 

ers of war ; or they might be free. How could the British 
authorities look into and decide any of these questions 1 Or, 
indeed, what duty or power, according to the principles of 
national intercourse, had they to inquire at all V To this 
it might be replied, that they did not attempt to inquire, but 
let each one decide and act for himself, refusing to allow one 
part of the persons on board to exercise violence in depriv- 
ing the other class of liberty. Mr. Webster further refers 
to Mr. Calhoun's resolutions, so called, in the Senate in 1840, 
as " resolutions iinanimovsbj adopted by that body," and re- 
quires Mr. Everett, in all his " communications with Her 
Majesty's Government," to " seek to impress it with a full 
conviction of the dangerous imjiortancc to the peace of the two 
countries, of occurrences of this kind, and the delicate nature 
of the questions to which they give rise." In other words, 
he was to hint significantly towards a threat of war, on ac- 
count of these slaves. 

There is an important authority against this claim, that 
has not been noticed in the whole of this controversy. It is 
an official opinion given Dec. 6, 1S31, on requisition of the 
Secretary of State, by Mr. Taney, then Attorney General, 
but now Chief Justice of the United States. It orginated 
in an application of a Mr. Brooks, "to ascertain whether the 
right of property in a slave, employed as a seaman, on board 
of a British merchantman, would be protected by the Gov- 
ernment of the United States." Mr. Taney says, 

" The laws of the several States, made in the exercise of 
their constitutional powers, are unquestionably a part of the 
laws of this country, to the extent of the territory on which 
they operate. If, therefore, by the laws of any of the States, 
a slave becomes free as soon as he is brought within the 
limits of the State ; and a slave belonging to a British sub- 
ject, and employed as a seaman on board a British merchant 
vessel, is found within the limits of the State, and is there 
taken by the State authorities from the possession of his own- 
er, and declared to be free, the General Government is un- 
der no obligation to interfere in behalf of the master, and he 
has no right to call on the United States to support him in 
his claim of property. It is, perhaps, unnecessary now to 
inquire whether the United States could by treaty, control 
the several States in the exercise of this power. I think 
they could not. But the decision of that question is not ma- 
terial in the present state of things ; for there is no conflict 
between the stipulations in the treaty and the laws of the 
several States which forbid the introduction of slaves within 



108 APPENDIX. 

their limits, and declare that persons of that description, 
when introduced, shall be free." 

But Mr. Webster concedes away his whole case, when he 
says, 

" If, indeed, without unfriendly interference, and notwith- 
standing the fulfilment of all their duties of comity and as- 
sistance by these authorities, the master of the vessel could not 
retain the j>ersons, nor prevent their escajie, then it icould be a 
different question altogether, whether resort could be had to 
British tribunals, or the power of the Government in any of 
its branches to compel their apprehension and restoration." 

It was the withdrawal of the assistance of the British au- 
thorities that disabled the owners from preventing the escape 
of the negroes. An able article was published in the Vir- 
ginia papers, written by Conway Robinson, Esq., an emi- 
nent lawyer of that State, proving from the decisions of 
British Courts, and particularly from the great case of Forbes 
vs. Cochrane, where Judge Helroyd laid down the law thus 
— " The law of slavery is a law in inviium [against the will 
of the subject,] and when a party gets out of the territory 
where it prevails, and out of the power of his master, and 
gets under the protection of another power, without any 
wrongful act done by the 'party siring thatjn'otcction, the right 
of the master, which is founded on the municipal law of the 
particular place only, does not continue." 

Of the multitude of able and eloquent comments of news- 
papers on Mr. Webster's letter, space is afforded only to a 
single extract from the London Times : 

" We do not doubt that he feels the difficulty of his task — 
we believe he is alive to the audacity of requiring that Eng- 
lish magistrates should administer American law on English 
territory. His tone is not that of a man who thinks himself 
in the right. But he finds it necessary to avoid drawing 
down on his own head and that of the American Executive 
all that raving of Mr. Calhoun and his friends which at pre- 
sent finds a more innocuous vent in the direction of Great 
Britain. And with this view he has had to write a letter 
which shall have about it enough display of argument, and 
menace, to satisfy these warmer spirits, without absolutely 
closing the door against reconciliation, or palpably making a 
fool of himself in the eyes of the British Minister. If these 
are his objects, his letter deserves much credit for the ingen- 
uity with which he has accomplished them. In the first he 
seems to have been completely successful. Mr. Walker 
expressed his gratitude at the tone and principle of the in- 



APPENDIX* 109 

structions. Mr. Calhoun had heard the documents read with 
great pleasure. The argument occupied the whole ground, 
and coming from the source it did, it would put, he hoped, 

an end to this dangerous and unpleasant controversy. 

Judging from the cogency of Mr. Webster's arguments, as 
they appear to us, we can only comprehend this excess of 
satisfaction in those in whose behalf they are adduced, upon 
the supposition that Messrs. Calhoun and Co. are sharp 
enough to see how the real merits of the matter stand, and 
are actually surprised to find how much can be said for them ; 
like the winner in a famous law suit, from whom the speech 
of his own able counsel is said to have elicited the incautious 
ejaculation, that ' he had never known he was such an hon- 
est man before.' Of this we wish Mr. Webster joy." 

The facility with which Mr. Webster speaks of Madison 
Washington, and his associates as " mutineers and murder- 
ers," might well feel rebuked by the remarks of Chief Jus- 
tice Marshall, in the case of Thomas Nash, alias Robbins, 
an impressed seaman, who was demanded of our Govern- 
ment, while Jay's treaty was in force, on a charge of mur- 
der. " The act," he said, " of impressing an American, is an 
act of lawless violence. The confinement on board a vessel 
is a continuance of that violence, and an additional outrage. 
Death committed within the United States, in resisting such 
violence, would not have been murder, and the person giving 
the wound would not have been treated as a murderer. — 
Thomas Nash was only to have been delivered up to justice 
on such evidence as ' had the fact been committed in the United 
States, would have been sufficient to have induced his com- 
mitment and trial for murder.' " 

Mr. Webster's affirmation that slaves are treated as pro- 
perty, by the Federal Government, in the States, guarded 
and almost deceptive as it is, is yet palpably contradicted by 
the uniform decisions of Congress with regard to all claims 
of payment for slaves who have been impressed or otherwise 
brought into the public service, and killed or lost. The case 
of Mariguy D. Auterive, which was before Congress almost 
ten years, and finally quashed in 1S2S, is well known to Mr. 
Webster, and is conclusive on this head. 

The case of the Creole was brought into the negotiation 
between Mr. Webster and Lord Ashburton, which resulted 
in the treaty of Washington. There is no record of these 
negotiations known to the world, except some letters, which 
appear to have been written after the whole business was 
settled, and written on a mutual understanding that they 



HO APPENDIX. 

were written for the " outside people." Mr. "Webster's let- 
ter on the Creole bears date Aug. 1, 1842. It is long and 
ingenious, but the point which he elaborates with the great- 
est care, is, " that by the comity of the law of nations, and 
the practice of modern times, merchant vessels entering open 
ports of other nations for the purposes of trade, are presumed 
to be allowed to bring with them, and to retain for their pro- 
tection and government, the jurisdiction and laws of their 
own country." Hence he infers that persons on board an 
American ship, being slaves while on the high seas, are also 
slaves in a British port, although they would be free as he 
admits, if they were to touch the land. While elaborately 
constructing this argument, he admits what seems to us to 
deprive it of all value to him, namely, that a State may de- 
clare such of its laws as it pleases to extend over its own 
waters. Now we take it to be distinctly the law of England 
that slavery can exist no more in its waters than on its solid 
land ; and we think an attempt to. make a distinction be- 
tween the two is utterly unwarranted and futile. According 
to Mr. Webster's argument, an American vessel might retain 
her slaves at London Bridge. What Englishman, knowing 
slaves to be in her, would not immediately apply for a writ 
of Habeas Corpus, and triumphantly effect their liberation ] 

The most surprising part of the whole is its effect upon 
the British Ambassador, as disclosed by the tone in which 
Lord Ashburton replies to it. He entirely evades the argu- 
ment, with an appearance of timidity for which we are sure 
there could have been no grounds ; while the absence of any 
adequate enunciation of British law, or declaration of British 
feeling, in reference to freedom, gives a suspicious and un- 
satisfactory aspect to the following passage : 

" In the meantime, I can engage that instructions shall be 
given to the Governors of Her Majesty's colonies on the 
southern borders of the United States to execute their own 
laws with careful attention to the wish of their Government 
to maintain good neighborhood, and that there shall be no 
officious interference with American vessels driven by acci- 
dent or violence into those ports. The laws and duties of 
hospitality shall be executed ; and these seem neither to re- 
quire nor to justify any further inquisition into the state of 
persons or things on board of vessels so situated, than may bo 
indispensable to enforce the observance of the municipal law 
of the colony, and the proper regulation of its harbors and 
waters.** 

This concession or pledge, excited the greatest dissatis- 



APPENDIX. Ill 

faction in England, was discussed with much earnestness and 
severity in both Houses of Parliament, and for a long time 
stood in the way of the legislation necessary for carrying out 
die treaty. 

In the American Senate, the debates on the ratification of 
the treaty show that this concession was deemed of great im- 
portance. The following extract from the speech of Mr. Cal- 
houn, may serve as a specimen of their exultation : 

" In the first place, the broad principles of the law of na- 
tions, on which he placed our right in his resolutions, have 
been clearly stated and conclusively vindicated in the very 
able letter of the Secretary of State, which has strengthened 
our cause not a little, as well from its intrinsic merit as the 
quarter from which it comes. In the next place, we have 
an explicit recognition of the principles for which we con- 
tend, in the answer of Lord Ashburton, who expressly says, 
that " on the great general principles affecting this case" 
(the Creole) " they do not differ ;" and that is followed by 
" an engagement that instructions shall be given to the Gov- 
ernors," &c, as above. 

" This pledge was accepted by our Executive, accompa- 
nied by the express declaration of the President, through the 
Secretary of State. To all this it may be added, that strong 
assurances are given by the British negotiator, of his belief 
that a final arrangement may be made of the subject by posi- 
tive stipulations in London. Such is the state in which the 
negotiation has left the subject. 

" Here again he would repeat, that such stipulations in the 
treaty itself would have been preferable. But who can deny, 
when he compares the state of the facts, as they stood before 
and since the close of this negotiation, that we have gained 
— largely gained — in reference to this important subject I 
Is there no difference, he would ask, between a stern and 
peremptory denial of our right, on the broad and the insult- 
ing ground assumed by Lord Palmerston, and its explicit 
recognition by Lord Ashburton '. — none in the pledge that 
instructions should be given to guard against the recurrence 
of such cases, and a positive denial that we had suffered no 
wrong or insult, nor had any right to complain ] — none be- 
tween a final closing of all negotiations, and a strong assur- 
ance of a final adjustment of the subject by satisfactory ar- 
rangement by treaty ? And would it be wise or prudent on 
our part to reject what has been gained, because all has not 
been 1 As to himself he must say, that at the time he moved 
his resolutions, he little hoped, in the short space of two 



112 APPENDIX. 

years, to obtain what has already been gained ; and that he 
regarded the prospect of a final and satisfactory adjustment, 
at no distant day, of this subject, so vital in its principles to 
his constituents and the whole South, as far more probable 
than he then did this explicit recognition of the principles for 
which he contended. In the mean time he felt assured the 
engagement given by the British negotiator would be fulfil- 
led in good faith ; and that the hazard of collision between 
the countries, and the disturbance of their peace and friend- 
ship, has passed away, as far as it depends on this dangerous 
subject. But if in this he should unfortunately be mistaken, 
we should stand on much more solid ground in defence of 
our rights, in consequence of what has been gained ; as there 
would then be superadded broken faith to the violation of the 
laws of nations." 

The sincerity of this exultation on the part of the slave- 
holders may be seen in the vote on the ratification of the 
treaty. Notwithstanding the determination declared by the 
press and by Senators, not to allow the boundary question to 
be settled without indemnity for the past and security for 
the future, in cases like that of the Creole, the treaty was 
ratified, as appears by the record. On the question to agree 
thereto, It was decided in the affirmative : Yeas 39, nays 9. 

Those who voted in the affirmative are — 

Messrs. Archer, Barrow, Bates, Bayard, Berrien, Calhoun, 
Choate, Clayton, Crafts, Crittenden, Cuthbert, Dayton, 
Evans, Fulton, Graham, Henderson, Huntington, Kerr, 
King, Mangum, Merrick, Miller, Morehead, Phelps, Porter, 
Preston, Rives, Sevier, Simmons, Smith, of Indiana, Sprague, 
Tallmadge, Tappan, Walker, White, Woudbridge, "Wood- 
bury, Wright, Youn<_r. 

Those who voted in the negative are — 

Messrs. Allen, Bagby, Benton, Buchanan, Conrad, Linn, 
Smith, of Connecticut, Sturgeon, Williams. 



SKETCHES 



OF THE 



LIFE AND WRITINGS 



OF 



JAMES GILLESPIE B1RNEY 



BY JBERIAH GREEN. 



UTICA, N. Y. 

PUBLISHED BY JACKSON & CHAPLIN 



1844. 



Entered according to the Act of Congress, in the year 1844, by 

JAMES C. JACKSON, 

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States, for the 

Northern District of New York. 



It. W. ROBERTS, PRINTER, 

58 Gcncscc Street, 

UTICA. 



PREFACE. 



The record of a good man's life naturally bears the aspect 
of eulogy. It is his prerogative to bless — his privilege to 
be blessed. The following facts from the history, and para- 
graphs from the writings, of Mr. Birney fully justify the esti- 
mate, given in these pages, of his character. The study of 
such a subject is both instructive and delightful. May it 
prove as deeply so to the reader as it has been to the writer. 
When as a People, we discover where are our men of Wis- 
dom and Strength ; when we learn to repeat their names 
with the confidence and veneration, to which they are enti- 
tled ; when we welcome them to their proper places amidst 
the relations and responsibilities of life, the evils, multiplied 
and frightful, which now stare us in the face, will retire. 
Our condition and prospects will then be worthy of our 
privileges. Will not every reader contribute his share 
towards such a consummation ? 13. G. 

Wiiitestown, July, 1S44. 



LIFE OF JAMES G. BIRNEY. 



Faith and works — the ideal and the actual- — theory and 
practice — things, which God hath joined together, different 
men in various ways try to put asunder. Some there are* 
who under this or that relation — in certain spheres of respon- 
sibility, seem to be exclusively engrossed with the ideal. 
The world, so far as human agency is concerned, is, they 
see, ill governed. Selfishness is made the basis of institu- 
tions and arrangements, maintained professedly for the ben- 
efit of mankind. Hence, the disorder, confusion and misery > 
which every where prevail. They are sick of these things — 
they are eager to get away from them. The folly) in which 
things so hateful and destructive had their origin, they 
regard as too rank and inveterate to be subdued. They 
have no heart to attempt a reformation. Why should they I 
Their exertions will be fruitless. The old world must wag 
on in its own chosen way, and get to perdition as best it 
can. As little as possible will they have to do with its 
ecclesiastical, political, and economical concerns. They 
are above all these. Their home is the spiritual sphere, 
where they find support, refreshment and delight in the 
ideas which shine upon their consciousness — in the princi- 
ples which demand their allegiance. Hence, say in the 
sphere of politics, they decry and abjure all those arrangc- 
ments, in which human rights and obligations are professedly 
described and asserted — in which the general welfare is 
professedly subserved. Human governments they pro- 
nounce an abuse, a usurpation, a nuisance. Of course, they 
trample on the elective franchise, and stand aloof from the 
ballot-box. The ethereal government, which they profess 
to reverence, needs, they say, no visible tokens — no symbols 
of its presence, authority, designs. — Others might consent t«> 
vote, if the ballot-box would come to them. In the work of 
electing rulers, they will not take a step, or lift a finger. 
In such matters it is their privilege to be indifferent; wait- 
ing for Heaven to correct the disorders and remove the 



2 LIFE OF BIRXEW 

evils, which they profess to deplore as much as any body. — - 
Others go to the ballot-box, and cast their votes for Justice, 
or Freedom, or Equity. When the chair of the Governor, 
the seat of the Senator, the bench of the Judge, is to be 
filled, they are for these divine ideas, pure, naked, disem- 
bodied. It is not known that they attempt to employ these 
ideas in blacking their boots, mending their stockings, or 
cooking their dinners. 

Surely mankind were sent hither on another and a higher 
errand than to be occupied exclusively with the ideal. This 
is indeed ever to be present to their thoughts, distinct in their 
consciousness, warm on their hearts. Without this they are 
blind and impotent. Without faith, they can neither please 
God, nor bless mankind. But faith without works — what 
can that avail % It must be for ever fruitless. Our business 
in this world is, amidst the various relations we sustain, to 
translate the ideal into the actual — to reduce theory to prac- 
tice — to show our faith by our works. It will not do, 
amidst the realities of life, to set up Justice, Freedom, 
Equity, as candidates for office. These must be embodied 
in human forms. We must have just, free, magnanimous 
Men, to wield the powers of government. This institution 
must be adapted to the condition in which we here are 
placed. We must see to it that the ideal live in the actual 
— that faith be embodied in works. 

But when in the political sphere it is insisted on, that in 
candidates for office sound principles shall be embodied in 
their characters ; that they shall not only speak eloquently, 
but act wisely; that the logic on their lips shall be made 
impressive and conclusive by the integrity of their lives ; 
that they shall show their love of freedom, not merely by 
impassioned declamation in exposing the wrongs of Greeks 
and Poles, but especially by asserting the rights and promot- 
ing the welfare of the oppressed around them, what a hue 
and cry is raised! A motley multitude rush around you, 
and shout, some one thing, and some another. Amidst the 
voices which are scattered in confusion on the air, words 
like these; fall upon your ear : Your theory may be good, 
but can not be reduced to practice. You go too far in as- 
serting the claims of Justice and Humanity. Here. to demand 
too much is to gain nothing. In such a world as this, wkere 
selfishness is the proper basis of society, we must be content 
to choose the least of the acknowledged evils to which we 
are exposed. The meaning of all this in plain English is, 
that this is the Devil's world, and we must submit to his 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 3 

authority, or go to wreck and ruin ! Hence the blind and 
impotent are chosen to guide and protect ; those who can 
not govern their own passions, to govern the republic ; 
knaves, to assert the claims of justice ; bad men, to perform 
good actions ; oppressors to defend the cause of freedom. 
To such lengths are matters carried in this direction, that 
integrity, magnanimity, philanthropy, are but too generally 
regarded as quite out of place in the sphere of politics. 
Such words may be employed to catch the public ear ; to 
round off a period in a stump oration ; to cover up the most 
nefarious designs. But to insist, that without the imperish- 
able qualities which these words describe, no man is quali- 
fied to wield official power ; this is generally reckoned the 
height of fanaticism. Indeed, it has come to that, that poli- 
tics, even by those who are most devoted to such things, are 
regarded as a vulgar and filthy concern. Hence, they exert 
themselves to dissuade every honest man from attempting 
to maintain sound principles in this sphere of responsibility, 
by cautioning him to beware how he dabbles in the dirty 
waters of politics. And this they do under the same impulse 
as led the Gadarenes to try to get rid of the Savior's 
presence. How could their evil-doings bear the light of 
His countenance 1 

Surely the occasion for a third party in politics is suffi- 
ciently obvious and stirring. The necessities which demand 
it reach down to the very foundations of Human Nature, 
and are as imperious as the authority of Heaven. Unless, 
by some means or other, the claims of truth, justice, free- 
dom, could be clearly explained, strongly asserted, and 
resolutely maintained, we must, as a nation, soon be utterly 
undone. Hcxce the Liberty Party. 

For a candidate for office, the Liberty Party must have 
one whose character is formed on the model of their princi- 
ples. He must be an incarnation of the truths which are 
the basis of their enterprise. They must animate his spirit, 
and shine through his countenance. He must give them 
form, and life, and expression. Through him their healthful 
influence must be exerted on every fit occasion. It is for 
the Liberty Party within the sphere of politics, to maintain 
the cause of justice, humanity and freedom. He, their can- 
didate, then, must be just, manly, free; — must have acquired 
self-possession and inward harmony; — justice, humanity, 
freedom, with these, as the breath of the Almighty, he must 
be inspired : — they must be the soul of his soul, the life of 
his life, the secret of his strength, or he can do little for the 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 



Liberty Party. True to their responsibilities, the Liberty 
Party have with great ivisdom selected James G. Birney as 
their candidate for President of the United States. 

Mr. Birney is about fifty years of age — in the full maturity 
of his powers. He was born in 1793, in Danville, Kentucky ; 
in a country equally beautiful and fertile. His father was a 
native of Ireland, strongly marked by the characteristic quali* 
ties of his countrymen. Prompt, ardent, enterprising; full of 
generous impulses; easily excited; strong in his attachments, 
and quick in his resentments ; frank, bold, vehement, he 
rose by wakeful and unwearied industry in the sphere of 
business from one position to. another, till he took a high 
place among the men of wealth around him. A deep inter- 
est he took in the institutions and arrangements and pros- 
pects of his adopted country ; — in whatever belongs to the 
sphere of politics. He was an ardent admirer of patriotism, 
of which he thought the name of Washington a striking 
symbol. And the statesmen of the school which maintained 
doctrines and pursued measures in opposition to the opin- 
ions and practice of the Father of his Country, whom he so 
greatly venerated, he regarded with deep-toned antipathy. — 
Mr. Birney's mother is understood to have been a beautiful 
and accomplished lady, with rich gifts, improved and refined 
by elegant culture. Her maiden name was Reed. Her 
family were remarkable for rare intellectual endowments, 
and for the figure which they made, near the summit of 
society. She died when James was a child. 

In his constitutional endowments, Mr. Birney seems to 
have been greatly blessed. Choice elements were here 
happily combined. His very being was strongly marked 
with the distinctive qualities and characteristic features of 
human nature. His great heart beat vigorously. He was 
full of life. His was a very liberal inheritance in the stuff', 
which men, true and strong, are made of. The elements of 
manliness were wrought into the very texture of his being. — 
He was a bright and beautiful boy, vigorous and active ; 
upon whom surrounding objects made a deep impression. 
He was alive, in a world instinct with the breath and a-glovv 
with the beauty of the Almighty. He early received upon 
him the impress of the truthfulness and dignity of Nature. 
Hence he was frank, truthful, manly. Falsehood, meanness, 
oppression — these things his young heart abhorred. His 
friends remember how valiantly, even when a school-boy, 
he struggled against tyranny, and how boldly he would tell 
the truth, even when it exposed him, as expose him it did 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. O 

repeatedly, to the rod of chastisement. — For it is not to be 
inferred from the hints now given, descriptive of Mr. Bir- 
ney's native character, that the blood of fallen Adam did 
not flow in his veins. Generosity, truth, justice, courage ; 
by these things was his very being strongly marked. An 
air of nobleness and grandeur was breathed around his very 
cradle. But these words, as applied to him, describe him not 
as absolutely conformed to the model on which human nature 
was originally constructed, but as compared with mankind at 
large. One perfect Man, and one only, has appeared since 
the great apostasy. When young, Mr. Birney was exposed, 
susceptible as he was, to influences which were too well 
adapted to give the animal within him the ascendancy over 
the spiritual. Wealth, fashion, luxury — how without a liv- 
ing faith in the Savior could he withstand their fascinations'? 
And he was not yet a Christian. His course was all along 
marked by those freaks and follies and excesses which 
might fairly be expected in a generous youth, well supplied 
with money, in the midst of boon companions, and without 
those powerful restraints and that healthful control, which 
the Gospel only can supply. But what in justice to the 
Hand that fashioned him is to be gratefully recorded, is, that 
his magnanimity, truthfulness, love of justice, courage, 
never, even amidst the irregularities of youth, forsook him. 
And these things were the basis on which Christianity has 
reared the well-proportioned, compact, beautiful structure, 
which it is our privilege now to describe. 

Of the natural courage, resolution and fidelity of Mr. Bir- 
ney, we have a striking instance in his early history. At the 
age of thirteen, he went with two other boys, one a cousin, to 
a piece of deep water, to amuse themselves with swimming. 
Birney was a good swimmer, his cousin merely a beginner. 
At a distance from the shore, a rail was set up on end, on 
whose top, a number of feet beneath the surface, one might 
pause and rest. Here Birney took his stand, and invited his 
cousin to come to him. That he undertook to do. As he ap- 
proached, Birney left the rail for him to occupy. But, wea- 
ried with the effort, he found it difficult to fasten on the resting 
place. Full of alarm, he seized on Birney, and down they 
went once, and down they went again. Their companion, 
still standing on the shore, shouted to Birney to let his cousin 
go, and take care of himself. Instead of this, he encouraged 
and assisted him, till his feet were planted on the rail. He 
now swam around him, cheering and supporting him, till his 
friend acquired self-possession. He then set oft", and swam 



6 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

ashore. Referring to the advice which his companion so 
earnestly gave him, to abandon his cousin for the sake of 
saving himself, he quietly observed : It never entered 
into my min'd to do so. The boy, who thus, in despite of 
the solicitations of a cold, calculating prudence, at the haz- 
ard of his life rescued his friend from a watery grave, must 
have had in him the elements of true greatness. 

Mr. Birney early enjoyed the benefit of a liberal educa- 
tion. At Nassau Hall, New Jersey, he was greatly distin- 
guished for the success with which he pursued his studies, 
where he was graduated in 1810, at the age of 17. After 
spending about two years in Kentucky, he went to Phila- 
delphia, where he entered the law office of Mr. Dallas. He 
returned to his native State, in the spring of 1S14. Soon 
after, he was chosen a member of the Legislature, where, 
young as he was, he exerted his powers as a public speaker 
with considerable effect. About this time, he married a 
young lady of strong attractions, who was akin to some of 
the most distinguished names in American history. At 
about the age of 25, he removed to Alabama. Here, for 
some five years, he was a planter, surrounded by some five 
and thirty slaves. From his plantation he removed to 
Huntsvilfe and resumed the practice of the law. His views 
of slavery at this time did not materially differ from those 
which prevailed around him. The relation which is founded 
on the chattel principle, he did not then condemn. His 
slaves, a small number excepted, he sold to a neighboring 
planter, who had the reputation of a humane master. After 
fixing his residence at Huntsville, he was presently chosen 
solicitor for the Judicial Circuit in which he lived — an 
office full of responsibility, and demanding no common meas- 
ure of integrity, resolution and courage. We have proofs, 
various and delightful, that lie honored his responsibilities — 
that his course was strongly marked by vigor, impartiality 
and magnanimity. His diligence, fidelity and intrepidity 
were crowned with marked results. His exertions in his 
proper sphere were rewarded with success. He rose high 
in the general estimation. Business beyond the sphere of 
criminal law flowed in upon him apace. The demands 
which were made upon him in civil processes, were at length 
too numerous and pressing to permit him to retain his office 
as solicitor. From this it may be inferred how lucrative 
and honorable his practice must have been. Near the close 
of his residence in Alabama, Mr. Bimey was chosen to a 
seat in the Legislature. 



LIFE OF MftXEY. / 

A single fact from the history of Mr. Birney's professional 
career in Alabama, illustrating his integrity, courage, mag- 
nanimity and generosity, may be as acceptable to our read- 
ers as it is refreshing to us. The following statement, from 
authority on which the fullest reliance may be placed, we 
give in the language, slightly altered, of our informant. 
Jackson county lay in his circuit. Three years' practice 
there as solicitor had made him acquainted with nearly all 
the people of the county. He was personally popular, 
though as prosecutor, he had acted rigorously. The making 
of counterfeit coin had become quite a business in that county, 
after he had resigned his office as solicitor. One day, a 
young man of very humble and rough appearance applied 
to him at Huntsville, where his office was, to bring a suit 
for him against some of the most respectable men in the 
county, for having lynched him on suspicion of his having 
aided his father, who wets a notorious coiner, and who as 
such had also been lynched. Between eight and nine hun- 
dred of the people of the county, embracing most of the 
influential men, had associated together as a lynch club ; 
and such was their power, that they inflicted punishments 
openly — knowing that no verdict could be had against them 
in Jackson county, where they would be sure to get some 
of their own friends upon the jury, if they failed to intimi- 
date those whom they had injured. It was hinted to him, 
that unless his cause was just, and himself free from the 
stains of a bad character, it must be far from desirable to 
engage for him in a struggle with such an influential corps. 
Satisfied in this respect, Mr. Birney undertook for him, and 
issued his writs against the wealthiest and most responsible 
men in the band, all of whom were personally his friends. — 
It had been his custom, in order to avoid traveling on Sun- 
day to the court-house, as was the custom of his brother 
lawyers, to go to the village where the court was held, the 
Saturday before. He had, of course, to travel alone. It 
was given out that he durst not go to the court-house — that 
he would be lynched, and so on. He proceeded, however, 
as if nothing unusual had happened, within a few miles of 
the village, he met a man, who was very anxious that he 
should return and stay with him till Monday, when the 
Judge, and the officers of the court, would be in the village. 
His exposure, then, would be less fearful. He went on, 
however, and put up at the tavern where he usually boarded. 
On the Sabbath he was at church ; and on Monday went about 
his business as usual, saluted even those whom he had sued, 



8 LIFE OF BIRXEY. 

quietly, and in full self-possession, as if nothing had happen- ' 
ed. Each wondered that all except himself did not insuk 
him. But they were confident that no jury could be found 
in that county, from which he could obtain a verdict. This 
he understood as well as they. He had therefore, made 
provision, through which the cause was to be tried in due 
season at Huntsville, the place of his residence. Be/are he 
left, however, he hrotoght the defendants to terms agreeable to 
his client ; pecuniary remuneration was made for the trespass ; 
and cm agreement was entered into by them never more to mo- 
lest him. The lynching business was broken up for that time, 

AND THE ASSOCIATION DISSOLVED. 

During his residence at Huntsville, the attention of Mr. 
Birney was fixed upon the truths of the Gospel, especially 
in their application to himself — to his own condition and 
prospects. The method of salvation provided in the Gospel, 
lie clearly saw his need of — heartily welcomed. He made 
a profession of religion ; and with deep sincerity and great 
earnestness entered on a course of Christian activity. How 
ho could any longer continue to be a slaveholder, is a fair 
question, on which many things might be offered. In no 
case can such a thing be justified. The relation in itself, 
whatever its origin and however continued, and in all its 
bearings, tendencies and effects, involves a manifest and fla- 
grant invasion of the dearest rights of Human Nature. It 
inflicts the deadliest injuries on all who give it their coun- 
t-nance and support. What other fruits could it be expect- 
ed to bring forth, opposed as it is to the fundamental princi- 
ples of a sound morality — to the leading maxims and char- 
acteristic truths of the Gospel % And yet the Christianity 
which prevails in our country regards it with great indul- 
gence, if not with secret complacency. Great numbers 
amono- U s, and of these not a few religious teachers, assert 
with one breath that slavery is every way a great evil, and 
in the next that the Bible gives it countenance ! Though 
condemned by the laws which are inscribed upon the human 
heart, they alledge that it is consistent with the doctrines 
and precepts of the Savior. Not a few eagerly fasten on 
the inference that they may be true Christians and yet hold 
slaves ! Accordingly, in the leading denominations in our 
country, slaveholders are welcomed to the churches, and 
often occupy high positions there. In all this, violence is 
done to the elemental principles of the human constitution. 
The demands of Justice, asserted in the depths of our be- 
ing with a God's voice, are contemned. Every thing noble, 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 9 

generous, manly, within us, is wantonly sacrificed. How 
can such a matter bear inquiry and discussion ] Amidst the 
facts of history, in the light of Reason, it stands exposed, 
condemned, abhorred. Concealment then must be practiced, 
inquiry discouraged, silence enjoined. And if now and then, 
amidst the enormities of slavery, attention should be arrested 
and speech extorted, every body is expected to look squint- 
eyedly, and speak with a double tongue. The result of all 
this is gross and wide-spread ignorance, whence, as weeds 
from a dunghill, the most noxious errors and hateful habits 
proceed. Trained up in such circumstances, and under 
such influences, what less could be expected than that any 
human being would be the victim of unworthy prejudices- 
would survey the objects around him, through a distorting 
medium — would embrace conclusions equally false and 
hurtful? And could a Christianity which had adjusted itself 
to slavery be expected to bring deliverance ] Now and 
then, as in the case of Mr. Birney, a mutilated Gospel may 
be the occasion of results which it is not adapted to produce. 
It may bring within the range of one's vision, truths which, 
in despite of the glosses whereby it would neutralize their 
power, may at length produce their appropiate effects : es- 
pecially at a time when influences from abroad, in behalf 
of truth, righteousness and freedom, in opposition to Ameri- 
can slavery, began to be exerted with considerable effect. 

With his great heart, with his love of truth, with his ex- 
traordinary candor, Mr. Birney might well be expected to 
take the condition and claims of the slave into earnest con- 
sideration. The wrongs which our countrymen inflicted on 
the Indians had deeply affected him. He mourned over the 
violation of public faith, which in its relation to that unhappy 
people, the republic had made itself guilty of. Such wick- 
edness, such folly, such infamy — such plague-spots upon the 
body politic, filled him with sorrow and indignation. In this 
case, he poured out his heart into the bosoms of his country- 
men, in behalf of outraged Humanity. 

His views and feelings on this subject may be inferred 
from the following paragraph of his, in which, it will be 
seen, he compares the argument whereby the colored Amer- 
ican was to be persuaded to go to Africa, with that by which 
the Indian was to be induced to abandon the sepulchres of 
his fathers for a home beyond the Mississippi. " I am here 
reminded of the very great resemblance this case bears, in 
its most prominent features, to that of the Indians, who have 
been moved upon, in nearly the same manner, to ' consent* 



10 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

to leave their lands within the limits of several of the States. 
To these unhappy people — unhappy because cruelly treated 
by those upon whom they, as children, cast themselves for 
protection — it was urged, that the encroachments and law- 
lessness of the whites would render their situation, whilst 
they remained near them, too grievous to be borne — that 
they would be far happier, when separated from us, in a 
country entirely under their own control — and in conclusion, 
that this advice was dictated by humanity — by a pure regard 
for their welfare. What was the Indian's reply ] ' 'Tis true, 
our situation, owing to the causes you have mentioned, is 
bad enough, but is it not made so by your negligence of 
right; and disregard of the most solemn stipulations] Will 
you, by your injustice — your fraud — your force, create the 
necessity which makes it expedient for us to remove to a 
wilderness, and then, by persuading us to fly from its de- 
structive influence, claim the praises of philanthropy and 
humanity ] Strange reasoning this ! — since it leads to the 
conclusion that the greater your frauds the louder will be 
the plaudits you will gather for good will to the poor Indian. 
Where are your treaties, by which you are solemnly bound, 
before God an4 the world, to conduct yourselves towards 
us, at least, with justice? Go tell your countrymen to 
restrain their avarice, withhold their force, repress their 
injustice — purify and elevate their morals, and not approach 
us with the disgusting skeleton of 2 } olicy, decked out with 
the tawdry vestments of h&mcvmty. Away with your hu- 
manity that is based on selfishness, we'll none of it!' " 

Compassion, awakened by one object, readily embraces 
others. From the Indian to the Negro, the transition was 
easy and natural. From his very boyhood, Mr. Birney had 
felt himself armed against oppression. In their struggles 
with the strong, the weak had always counted upon his 
countenance and aid. The slave had a commanding place 
in his thoughts and sympathies. He could hardly fail to^ 
see, when the wrongs of the Indian had thoroughly aroused 
him, that the Bufferings of the Negro flowed from the same 
bitter fountain. With renewed and increased earnestness, 
therefore, he applied himself to the subject of slavery. 

He was for a while arrested in his progress towards just 
conclusions and healthful action, by the scheme of African 
Colonization. It was generally maintained, and that stoutly 
enough, that Immediate Emancipation must be fraught with 
many and frightful perils. Slavery was admitted to be an 
outrage on Human Nature ; but then it would never do at 



LIFE OF B1RNEY. 11 

once to restore to the slave the rights to which he was in- 
alienably entitled ! What mischiefs, what crimes, what 
misery must be the inevitable consequence! If slavery was 
a great evil, its immediate abolition, it was asserted, must 
be a greater ! And such words were upon the lips, not 
only of the thoughtless and profane, but also of professed 
saints and reputed prophets. Almost nobody dared to con- 
tradict them. But to expatriate the free negro to Africa : — 
could Benevolence in the name of Freedom hit upon a hap- 
pier expedient. 1 In this way,x)ur debt to Africa might be 
liquidated. Her long lost sons, a nuisance here, would be 
a blessing there ! Ignorant and degraded here, there they 
would be wise and honorable ! No power could raise them 
here to the dignity of manhood ; there they would sponta- 
neously rise to the glory of saintshrp ! Unworthy here to 
be door-keepers in the house of the Lord, there they would 
at once be welcomed to the Holy of Holies, as the anointed 
priests of Heaven ! One class of our fellow citizens was 
incited to give this enterprise its countenance, under the 
pretense that it would facilitate the emancipation of the 
slaves, by providing the means of shipping them off before 
they had time to cut the throats of their masters. The 
cooperation of another was expected, on the ground that 
the removal of the free people of color would set slavery 
free from a powerfully disturbing force, to which it was 
exposed. And then the missionary tendencies of the 
scheme; could it once succeed, how soon would "Ethiopia 
stretch forth her hands unto God !" Vision after vision, 
resplendent with all the colors of the rainbow, animated the 
dreams of philanthropy. And James G. Birney, in common 
with many of our truest men, was for a time led astray by 
this glittering ignis-fatuus. And like an earnest man as he 
was, he vigorously pursued the phantom which, under the 
guise of an angel* of light and love, was beckoning its fol- 
lowers on to an apparent Paradise, but to a real quagmire, 
gilded by dense fog. 

So much in earnest was Mr. Birney in trying the virtues 
of this scheme for delivering our country from the evils of 
slavery, that he abandoned a profession equally lucrative 
and honorable, to prosecute an agency in its behalf. He 
exerted himself with resolution and fidelity to enlist the 
sympathies and cooperation of his countrymen, white and 
black, in favor of a design, which, he persuaded himself, 
was full of blessings, both for America and Africa. For 
this purpose, he visited the principal places in a large dia- 



12 LIFE OP BIRNEY. 

tricl of country around him, embracing no less than five 
large States, and pursued the object to which he was de- 
voted, with what was reckoned encouraging success. But 
as the result of more careful observation and deeper reflec- 
tion, he became thoroughly convinced, that the scheme he 
was supporting lacked the basis of sound principle : that it 
was as impracticable in its application as it was hurtful in 
its tendencies. He could no longer lend it his countenance. 
His views on this subject are expressed with great beauty 
and power, in a Letter to the Rev. Mr. Mills, Corresponding 
Secretary of the Kentucky Colonization Society. 

A few extracts here, we are sure, will be acceptable to 
our readers. In the following paragraph, he alludes with 
piercing pungency to the methods tried on the colored 
American, to extort his "consent" to abandon his native 
country for the shores of Africa. " If its operations ,be limit- 
ed to the gratification of an intelligent wish, on the part 
of the free people of color, or any other class of our popula- 
tion, to remove to Africa, with the view of establishing a 
colony for the prosecution of an honest commerce, or 
for any lawful purpose whatever, there could exist, so far 
as I can see, no reasonable ground of opposition, any more 
than to the migration, that is now in progress, of crowds of 
ourfellow citizens to Texas, or any other part of Mexico. If, 
on the other hand, it is meant, that this 'consent' 1 may law- 
fully be obtained by the imposition of civil disabilities, 
disfranchisement, exclusion from sympathy ; by making the 
free colored man the victim of a relentless proscription, 
prejudice and scorn; by rejecting altogether his oath in 
courts of justice, thus leaving his property, his person, his 
wife, his children, and all that God has by his very consti- 
tution made dear to him, unprotected from the outrage and 
insult of every unfeeling tyrant, it becomes a solemn farce, 
it is the refinement of inhumanity, a mockery of all mercy, 
it is cruel, unmanly, and meriting the just indignation of 
every American, and the noble nation that bears his name. 
To say that the expression of 'consent' thus extorted is the 
approbation of the mind, is as preposterous as to affirm that 
a man consents to surrender his purse, on the condition that 
you spare his life, or, to be transported to Botany Bay, 
when the hand of despotism is ready to stab him to the 
heart." 

Again. "The influence of these principles is opposed to 
emancipation. I am not unaware that it has been supposed 
to be adjutory to emancipation ; and proof of this is offered 



LIFE OF BIRNET. 13 

in the S00 or 900 slaves that have been transported to Libe- 
ria. The fact, that about this number have been emancipa- 
ted by transportation to Africa, is admitted. These are all 
the instances of emancipation, that can be attributed to 
the influence of colonization principles — for when they insist 
that emancipation should never be divorced from deportation, 
they can not lay claim to the many thousands who are eman- 
cipated in this country, that they may, if they choose, re- 
main here, and who have remained here. It would be an 
unfair pretension, to ascribe to the influence of certain prin- 
ciples, effects, which they have no natural and inherent ten- 
dency to produce. But it is very confidently believed and 
asserted, that the discussion of colonization throughout 
our country has, incidentally, brought up the subject of 
slavery to public consideration — and that to this are to be 
set down the numerous emancipations that have been granted, 
where the beneficiaries have not been sent out of the country. 
I grant, it is probable, that in this way many persons may 
have been led to see the duty of emancipation, who would 
not otherwise have been conducted to a knowledge of it, 
But would it not be altogether illogical to ascribe emancipa- 
tions, in the country, to a principle that insisted upon emanci- 
pations, out of the country ? Fully as much so, it seems to 
me, as to ascribe the conversion of a man to the Christian 
religion, to his having heard the ingenious arguments of an 
infidel — when, in truth, it may have been only the occasion 
upon which his mind discovered, for the first time, the weak- 
ness of infidelity, and the strength of the Gospel. 

" But, sir, during all this time — these 16 or 17 years of 
gloom to the slave — what has not been lost to the cause of 
freedom and religion, by the substitution of a cowardly, 
incidental discussion of slavery, for one which is manly and 
undisguised 1 If the sly and incidental presentation of it pro- 
duce the effects with which it is credited, how much more 
rich, blessed and abundant would they have been, had it been 
pressed openly and directly, yet kindly, upon the hearts and 
consciences and patriotism of this community ! It is to be 
feared that we, who have been supporters of colonization, 
have, through ignorance, been instrumental in prolonging, at 
least through one lifetime, the dark reign of slavery on the 
earth, and in sending one generation of our fellow men, 
weeping witnesses of its bitterness, to a comfortless grave! 

" So thorough has been the inoculation of the public with 
the sentiment, that our slaves, if emancipated, must be re- 
moved from the country, that its effects are of surprising 



14 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

uniformity. Address men in this way — ' Do you not believe 
that slavery is sinful, and in direct opposition to the princi- 
ples of our government V the ieply — almost without excep- 
tion — is, what shall we do with our slaves, if we manumit 
them \ Where shall we send them % It will never do, in the 
world, for them to remain among us — it is better to retain 
them as they are, indefinitely in slavery, than to liberate 
them here ! This feeling has led to cases of great apparent 
inhumanity and uncharitableness. One of these has come 
to my knowledge in sodirecta manner, that I have no ground 
for doubting the truth of it in any particular. A person 
Hying in a slave State is the owner of a good-looking young 
man, who is permitted, on his parole of honor, to reside in 
Cincinnati — to receive the hire for his own services from the 
gentleman in whose employment he is — not in any part for 
his own use, but tobetransmittedaccordingtohis [the slave's] 
discretion to his owner. He has learned to read and write, 
and has given, in his uniform conduct, the best evidence that 
he is, in truth, as he professes to be, a Christian. He has 
never, in the least degree, violated his integrity toward his 
owner, by retaining any of the fruits of his own toil, or by 
asserting his liberty, as he might, at any time, do in Ohio. 
His friends and connections are all residents of this country. 
This circumstance, united to a very unfavorable opinion of 
the present condition raid future prospects of Liberia, has 
made him entirely averse to a removal thither. He has a 
strong desire to obtain his freedom, and has offered for it a 
large sum. His offers have been steadily met by a refusal, 
at any i^rice — yet he has been promised his liberty gratuitous- 
hj, if he will 'consent' to emigrate to Liberia. To this he 
entertains an insurmountable repugnance — preferring to 
remain in his present condition, although his noble spirit is 
almost worn down with its hopelessness. Now, sir, were it 
not for the prevalent opinion, that the colored man, whatever 
may be his intellectual or moral elevation, can never be 
respectable or happy among us, I doubt whether such a case 
as this, calling for the deepest sympathy, the most earnest 
commiseration, could have been found in the private annals 
of western slavery. There is no country, in its best state, 
that would not suffer loss by the banishment of such a man." 
And then : " Colonization principles have in a great 
degree, paralyzed the power of the tr ntli, and of the ministry 
in the South. That the messages of the Gospel have com- 
paratively but little intluence upon mind, in the exclusively 
planting sections of the country, where the number of slaves 



LIFE OF BIRNET. 15 

is great, will not be denied by any impartial and considerate 
observer. This I am not inclined to attribute to any defect 
in the inherent power of the great truths — as applicable to 
southern mind — adapted by God so wisely to the internal 
constitution of man. For there have been, and there are 
yet, daily overturned by them, sins as besetting and as soul- 
destroying, as slavery. When I recollect, top, the condition 
of the Roman Empire, at the time when Paul preached in 
her voluptuous metropolis, and throughout her scarcely 
less voluptuous tetrarchics : the aggravated system of slavery 
that prevailed there — the incontinence — the political corrup- 
tion — the private vice — and that over all these Christianity 
chanted her mild triumphs, I see no reason for distrusting 
her efficacy, when fairly tried upon any portion of our coun- 
trymen. But when I farther remember, that he was par- 
taker in no vicious custom of the country, leading him to 
perpetrate injustice and to overlook mercy ; that whatever 
impurity might be demanded by social maimers, or authoriz- 
ed by municipal institutions, lie kept himself 'pure ; that, when 
thrown into the very midnight of Roman pollution, his 
Christianity was seen, emitting a clearer, purer, and more 
quenchless lustre — the secret of his success is fully revealed. 
Behold, at the present time, a professed follower of Paul 
and of his Master — blessed, perhaps, with a sound education 
in letters and science — versed in Christian lore — brought 
up in the land of the free ! with a mind revolting against 
slavery and every form of oppression ; see him, making 
his way to the South, ready with the fervor of a neophyte, 
to declare the messages of God's love to all for whom 
they were intended ; — see him, almost as soon as the intro- 
duction to the scene of action is past, beginning his labor 
of love by utterly neglecting ' to preach the Gospel to the 
poor' — by lamenting the hard lot of masters, the evil of 
slavery — complaining of the wickedness of the slaves — 
excusing every thing in the slaveholder, except acts of 
cruelty that rouse a neighborhood to astonishment ; next, 
marrying a widow, or a ward, or a ''fortune,' with a retinue 
of his parishioners for her dowry ; afterward, talking bravely 
of the price of cotton, and of men to make it ; and, at last, 
in desperation, drumming into silence his agonizing and 
wailing conscience by using the very book of God's love to 
justify maris oppression ; — seeing all this, the secret of his 
unsuccessfulness is made as clear as noon-day. Slavery 
has shorn him of his strength, and his hands are as indolent 
and uncertain in pointing out the way of life — if they 



16 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

point at all — as are the hands of a chronometer to point out 
the progress of time during the last half hour, previously 
to its running down. 

" I am altogether unconscious of any feeling which would 
prompt me to utter an unkind word against ministers of the 
Gospel in the South. There are amongst them, I know, 
men of the most sterling principle-*— who, so far as they are 
individually concerned, have lived, and are yet living, ele- 
vated far above the pestilential influence of slavery. To 
such, in my apprehension, the most disinterested witnesses — 
I appeal for testimony in the case ; and ask, if the marriages 
of poor ministers with widows rich in slaves have not be- 
come so frequent as to take away from them their 'casual,' 
or * accidental ' character — if they have not brought a deep 
reproach upon the cause of religion,-^— and if those gentlemen 
who have thus entangled themselves in the meshes of slavery, 
are not looked upon by the very people to whom they were 
sent, and who are in the same condemnation, as 'blind 
watchmen, dumb dogs that can not bark, sleeping, lying 
<lown to slumber]' And further, whether those gentlemen, 
who, on the rare occasions of their preaching, rebuke 
with all authority the profanation of the Sabbath — the love 
of money, luxury, profanity, intemperance, &c. &:c. — who 
have been heard to pray with all fervor for the Poles, the 
Greeks, and all the down-trodden of foreign lands, have ever 
been heard, in any of their public ministrations, to prefer but 
one listless prayer for the conversion of the slaveholder to 
the doing of justice — his heart to the love of mercy, and that 
the two millions of his 'neighbors' lying in bondage before 
his eyes, might, by the force of Christian principle be enlar- 
ged, and the oppressed among us go free] And, yet further, 
are not such slaveholding ministers somewhat warmer in 
their attachment to colonization, than the majority of other 
men ] Do not they insist upon its capacity for the exter- 
mination of slavery, as a reason why they do not themselves 
act more decisively upon the subject ] and do they not in 
frequent instances, become angry and indignant at those 
who attempt to agitate their consciences, by holding up their 
own duty in reference to slavery, fight before them ?" 

And here again : " Dr. Finley doubtless intended by his 
scheme, the permanent benefit and exaltation of the whole 
class of free colored people. If so, he was led into the 
error into which, I think, he fell, by contemplating, with 
great intensity of feeling, nothing but the down-trodden state 
of that people among us — throwing altogether out of the 



LIFE OP BIRXEY. 17 

range of his vision the causes which produced it, and for- 
getting the energy of those great principles, asserted first by 
this nation, and even yet received by a great majority of it as 
undeniable and self-evident, and which might stiil be plucked 
from their drowning state, for its fuller melioration and 
correction, here. He supposed it was easier to remove from 
the country those who were the subjects of this degradation, 
than to successfully combat and overthrow the prejudices 
and false principles which produced it. He fell into a simi- 
lar mistake with those who think that slavery can be exter- 
minated by transporting to another country such of the 
slaves as may be liberated among us, without having first 
given the death-blow to slavery, itself the i>roducing princi- 
plc—nnd forgetting that the few who would be emancipated, 
under such circumstances, would be only the super/' 
occasioned by the generative power of the principle, and 
their abstraction but lopping off" the dead and unsightly 
branches of Upas, and giving to it rtfore comeliness and vigor. 

"Had he been in Turkey, and seen some thousands of 
Christians in the same condition as that occupied by the free 
colored people in the United States, rearing their families 
under all the oppressions of that government, as they are 
exercised upon those who are even nominally Christians, it 
would have been an act of benevolence to persuade them 
to remove— -albeit, to a wild and unsettled coast — and 
of still greater benevolence, to have provided the means 
for their transportation. Why 1 because neither the govern- 
ment of Turkey, nor the moral structure of Turkish society 
contains ink any principle acknowledged by ali to be 'un- 
deniable,' 'self-evident/ — which could be held up and urged 
and traced in its consequences, before the people and those 
in power, of sufficient efficacy to condemn their practice. 
They are both constituted upon the principle, that it is right 
to persecute a 'christian dog' — to kick him, spit upon, deny 
him all legal privileges, and if he gives any, the slightest 
provocation, to bowstring him. Under such circumstances — 
where neither the government nor public sentiment acknowl- 
edge any principle sanitary and corrective of oppression — 
efforts tending to any other object than the removal of the 
oppressed from the scene of their sufferings, would justly be 
deemed enthusiastic and absurd. 

" But how widely different is the case here ! Does the 
advocate of slavery assert that it is right to oppress a fellow 
creature, because God has given him a complexion unlike 
what he has bestowed upon us? — to subject him to all the 

c 



18 LIFE OF BIPvXET. 

weight of the law, whilst there is wrested from him all its- 
jyoicer for his protection ] Does the slaveholder say it is 
rigid that slavery, with all its soul-killing enormities, as well 
as with its lesser evils, should be continued ? To meet this, 
with what powerful armor has God clothed the American 
patriot and Christian ! Shall he consent to extinguish 
slavery, by removing its redundancy- ? — a process that may 
be carried on for a hundred years, and, then, leave our 'last 
state worse than the first.' Or to compass sea and land, 
that he may find some hole or corner for the thrusting away 
of the free colored man, sad, sick at heart, by reason of 
oppression ? — that the slaveholder may repose in all the 
voluptuousness of the most undisturbed quiet ? Or shall he 
not rather raise the slaveholder's earth-directed vision to the 
clear arch of the sky, and bid him there read words that are 
eternal in the heavens, 'whatsoever ye would that men should 
do unto you, do you even so unto them,' with its noble com- 
mentary, 'all men are crefked equal, and have rights that are 
inalienable, to life, liberty and the pursuit of ha-ppiness V 
Shall he not rely upon the salutary operation of great prin- 
ciples sanctioned by God, and declared by man to be- 'unde- 
niable ;' that are of sufficient efficacy, wheree<er they are 
ably and honestly urcred, for the reformation of every unjust 
and pernicious usage in the land — rather than upon some 
poor shift, some conscience-calming expedient for the pres- 
ent exigency, whilst future exigencies — going into eternity, 
it may be — to which it is totally inadequate, are left entirely 
unprovided for." 

" But it was not long before the benevolent object of Dr. 
Finley was Greatly perverted, and the benefit that was 
intended for the free colored man — his chief aim was made 
secondary to the potici} of sending him away. At first, the 
apparent benevolence of the enterprise moved the spirits of 
some of the free people of color, and not a few of them, 
were preparing, doubtless, as true heralds of the cross, to 
bless benighted Africa. Emigrants offered" themselves in 
greater numbers than the means of the Society were com- 
petent to send out. Seeing this, the philanthropy of the 
enterprising was thrown somewhat in the background, or 
became, with many, merely auxiliary to the policy of sending 
out of the country the whole of the free colored population. 
In this way, it was recommended to the most determined 
slaveholder. He was reminded that the free colored man 
was a nuisance to the white — a source, almost the only one, 
of drsquiet Mid discontent to the slave,— -tb at he was bound- 



LIFE OF BIRXEV. 19 

Jessly degraded and vicious, polluted and polluting all 
around him, — and, that the fact of its being so might always 
remain as strong as it then was for sustaining such an arsfic- 
vient, it was asserted with ceaseless repetition, that in this 
degraded state he must continue as long as he resided 
among us — that here his condition was irretrievable, hope- 
loss, in fine, it was an ordination of Providence ! All this 
was surmounted by pceaw to our humanity. And the free 
colored man, for his encouragement was told, that the whole 
field of honorable ambition lay open before him ; that he 
might, in the land of his fathers, engage in the high offices 
of legislation — in the solemn ministrations of the altar — and 
in laying the foundation of a great people, a mighty Christ- 
ian nation, before whose feet the countless idolatries of 
Africa's unnumbered tribes would fall in ruins to the ground. 
"All this sounds well — but it will be found, on examina- 
tion, to contain principles at variance with each other, and 
mutually destructive. Let us suppose these motives to be 
addressed to an. intelligent free man of color, would not his 
train of reflections, most probably be somewhat of this kind i 
1 I belong, then, to a class which the white man declares to 
be a nuisance. If this is true, what has produced it % His 
own conduct. What has this been but a course of system- 
atic neglect, contempt, abuse — withholding from us every 
franchise and immunity of the government, whose tendency, 
he says, is to elevate and ennoble those who exercise them '\ 
We were thrown out from the charnel-house of slavery, igno- 
rant, unconscious of the want, unable to appreciate the ad- 
vantages of education — our families cut off from all associ- 
ates, except the degraded slave, or the polluted and polluting 
white : — and what has been done for us % Whilst the white 
man has- established, at great expense of life and treasure, 
schools- for the Caffre and Hottentots — for the Indian of 
Ceylon and the negro of New Zealand ; whilst he has his. 
missionary, on the one hand, plying with untiring step his- 
course to the summit of the Rocky Mountains, and, on the 
other, scaling the wall of China, to declare that Truth, 
which makes men 4 free indeed' — what has he done, what 
is he doing, for the- class, whose ignorance and error must 
be daily witnessed, and whose wants must be fully known I 
Nothing, nothings nothing. Whbt confidence, then, can I 
properly repose in a benevolence acting only afar qtf\ whilst 
it neglects so much at hand — in that charity which will dis- 
patch a band of missionaries to Africa, whilst it will not 
supply one to her eons fare.. though fainting— perishing fou 



20 LIFE OF BIRN'EY. 

the bread of life ? In what manner am I to estimate the 
sincerity of men — aye, of Christian men too — who, in one 
breath, tell me, their prejudices against us, whilst here, are 
insurmountable, but that they vanish when we are removed 
from them some six or seven thousand miles — that whilst 
we remain here, religion itself is incompetent to destroy 
them — but that when it acts across an ocean, it possesses 
wondrous, overmastering potency, for their extirpation : 
who 3ay, that here, under the restraints of wholesome laws, 
with the presence of the whites to check and control us, we 
are utterly unfit, because of our moral and intellectual de- 
pravity, for the enjoyment of the lowest privilege — yet, for- 
sooth, would fling us, with all our stupidity, our inexperi- 
ence, our vileness and infamy, in one unbroken and reeking 
mass, upon a distant land, — unchecked by wholesome laws, 
or animated by virtuous example — to do what 1 To carry 
on a system of piracy ? — of robbery 1 — or to establish a fac- 
tory for conducting a commerce in the blood and gore, and 
groans of our fellow men ] No : it is not in these occupa- 
tions we are to be employed, and for which, it would seem, 
our benefactors being witnesses, we are well fitted, but it is — 
O wonderful adaptation ! to Christianize and civilize one 
hundred millions of heathen ! ! 

" 'Again — if we are a nuisance now, by what necessity 
are we always to remain so ? Are we incapable of improve- 
ment — impenetrable to those great truths by which man's 
mind is enlightened — his heart purified, and he made a 
freeman indeed ? This can not be asserted without impugn- 
ing God's word. What, then, will make up this everlasting 
pressure ? Prejudice, prejudice — so proclaimed ' before all 
Israel, and before the Sun !' We have none against the 
whites. Deeply injured, neglected, vilified, as we have 
been, we are willing to pass it all by, take a lowly station, 
and cheerfully acknowledge their superiority. But how is 
this temper reciprocated 1 By still accumulating abuse. 
They say of us, as a class, we are diseased, sick, ready to 
die, and yet, by emigration to Liberia would they suck from 
us the most healthful blood that circulates in our system. 
They declare by their language — by their laws, an inflexible 
purpose to grant no mitigation of our ills, unless we respond 
harmoniously to their policy in sending us away. How then 
can we, in a matter so important to us— so far from our 
homes — so irremediable, if it fail, trust to those whose rigor 
of temper no persuasion can soften — whose selfish policy is 
the substance, our good but the accident ? 



LIFE OF EIRNEY. 21 

"'But further, why are we spoken of as a class ? why do 
they throw together the good, the bad, the indifferent, and 
make of them one mass, baptized by the name of nuisance, 
when they deal not thus with other men \ I do not per- 
ceive that men of black hair and of light-colored hair — of 
black eyes and blue eyes — of low stature and high stature, 
are spoken of in classes, to which any moral or intellectual 
designation is given. No : each one is judged by his own 
merits — nor are they mixed up with the vices and demerits 
of others, to make a foul and unsightly lump. This com- 
mon-sense and common-charity measure of judgment and 
treatment is all that I have a right to ask, it is all I desire, 
and justice can not withhold it. 

" ' But more than all, we are especially obnoxious to the 
slaveholder. Here is the spring of all this preparation. 
My fellow man is in bondage — the sight of a freeman of his 
own color released from chains will make the slave more 
restless under his; and the slaveholder, with his hand on 
the throat of my father, my brother, my sister or my moth- 
er, must, by all means, be kept tranquil and undisturbed — 
his property in man must be untouched, whilst he is robbing 
him of the use of the limbs and muscles that God gave, and 
of the daily products of their toil. And this is the sum and 
substance of this mighty charity ! We are to be driven 
from the country as a nuisance — we are to be persuaded 
by unceasing reiteration, that such we are now, and so we 
must remain, to all, — but especially to the unrelenting slave- 
holder.' ' O my soul, come not thcu into their secret — unto 
their assembly, mine honor, be not thou united !' " 

"But, sir, has it ever been known that commercial estab- 
lishments have proved to be sources of religious knowledge 
and improvement to the heathen, among whom they have 
been placed % The colony of Liberia is emphatically one 
of this character — there exists in it, according to all accounts, 
a rage for trade. Let us recur for a moment to the history 
of religious efforts among our neighboring Indians. Who, 
amongst us, would ever think of encouraging a trading sta- 
tion, or company of petty shop-keepers, (such as could be in- 
duced to emigrate for gain) and upholding them, as the best 
means of diffusing a knowledge of Christianity among the 
Indians, as missionary stations ! ! I will venture to say that 
among the greatest obstacles the true missionary has to en- 
counter in recommending 'Christ' to our aboriginal natives, 
is the influence, direct and indirect, of such establishments. 
When we consider their object, we can not be at a loss, for 



22 LITE OF B1RNEY. 

an instant, to arrive at this conclusion. It is to supply the 
wants of savage life, hut more especially the peculiar wants 
of savage life. 

" These peculiar wants are trinkets, baubles, beads, to- 
bacco, ardent spirits, fire-arms, pew-der and ball. It is the 
gratification of these wants that gives vitality, and their 
growth that gives encouragement to the trading stations. 
Now, so long as these peculiar wants exist, savageism must 
continue — so long as they grow, it must also be growing 
more rude and untameable. So superficial is this truth, that 
no missionary station, so far as I am informed, has ever been 
supplied with any of the articles mentioned above, calcula- 
ted to keep alive savage customs. What is the first work 
of the missionary? Is it not to allure to peace, to stationa- 
ry life, and habits of settled industry? If he succeed, he 
puts an end, in proportion to his success, to the sale of arms, 
powder and ball, whether they be intended to kill men, or 
for hunting. If he inculcate abstinence from the use of 
ardent spirits, he is brought directly in collision with the 
interest of the trader. Should he be blessed in his honest 
labors for the amelioration of savage life, it must be almost 
entirely by the annihilation of the trader's occupation. It 
would seem strange, then, that with experienced persons, 
there should, after twelve years' disastrous trial, too, at Li- 
beria, exist such pertinacity in insisting upon the practica- 
bility of uniting the trader and missionary — and that there 
should still be indulged such bloated expectations of good 
to the heathen of Africa, from the instrumentality of men 
who go out, [if preachers, so much the worse,] with fire- 
arms, powder and ball, and rum, in one hand, and the Bible 
in the other." 

Thus beautifully and impressively Mr. Birney concludes 
this letter : " Permit me, in conclusion to say, that the views 
submitted in this communication, are entertained after long 
and very circumspect examination of the main subject to 
which they apply. Born in the midst of a slaveholding 
community — accustomed to the services of slaves from my 
infancy — reared under an exposure to all the prejudices that 
slavery begets — and being myself, heretofore, from early 
life, a slaveholder — my efforts at mental liberation were 
commenced in the very lowest and grossest atmosphere. 
Fearing the reality, as well as the imputation of enthusiasm 
— each ascent that my mind made to a higher and purer 
moral and intellectual region, I used as a stand-point to sur- 
vey deliberately all the tract I had left. "When I remember 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 23 

1iow calmly and dispassionately my mind has proceeded 
from one truth connected with this subject, to another still 
higher — -that the opinions I have embraced, are those to 
which such minds and hearts as Wilberforce's and Clark- 
son's yielded their full assent — that they are the opinions of 
the disinterested and excellent of our own country ; T feel 
well satisfied that my conclusions are not the fruits of en- 
thusiasm. When I recur to my own observation, through a 
life already of more than forty years — of the anti-republi- 
can tendencies of slavery — and take up our most solemn 
State paper, and there see that 'all men are created equal, 
and have a right that is inalienable to life, liberty, and the 
pursuit of happiness ;' I feel a settled conviction of mind 
that slavery, as it exists among v.s, is opposed to the very 
essence of our government — and that by prolonging it, we 
are living down the foundation-principles of our happy insti- 
tutions, When I take up the Book of God's love, and there 
read, 'whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, 
do ye even so to them,' — my conviction is not less thorough, 
that slavery now is sinful in his sight. 

" But one word more. The views contained in this let- 
ter are my own, and they have been the result of my own 
reading, observation and thought. I am a member of no 
anti-slavery society — nor have I any acquaintance, either 
personally or by literary correspondence, with any of the 
northern abolitionists. — No one, besides myself, is committed 
by any thing I have said." 

After breaking through the meshes of this popular delu- 
sion, the attention of Mr. Birney was fixed more earnestly 
than ever on the subject of emancipation. His mind was 
for some time occupied with some planfor gradually restoring 
to the slaves the freedom of which they had been so cruelly 
deprived. With this, however, he was not long embarrass- 
ed. He saw clearly enough, that in this way the oppressor 
could not be led to repentance — could not be induced to 
break the yoke he had fastened upon the neck of his unof- 
fending brother. 

In a paper containing " the reply of Mr. Birney to queries 
of some Friends" in 1835, appears the following paragraph 
on this subject: " I consider all schemes of gradual eman- 
cipation as utterly unfit to meet the present evils, and to 
avert the dangers which threaten from the continued exist- 
ence of slavery. They are all, in the first place, imperative 
on the master***- they let go his conscience, by not insisting 
on immediate repentance for present sin. In the second 



24 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

place, they produce no good effect on the heart and mind of 
the slave. Founded on expediency, or policy, as all such 
plans must be, from their very nature, the slave will feel no 
respect for the motive which originates them. He will con- 
sider that nothing has been done from a regard to his rights, 
or his interests, but all for the advantage and benetit of the 
master. The master, uninfluenced by Christian principle, 
in the act of emancipation, would not, in all probability, 
follow his freedman with Christian effort for his moral and 
intellectual improvement — the freedman, feeling no respect 
for the motives of the master in giving him his liberty, would 
naturally, as it appears to me, reject his influence. Thus 
they would be left unbound by any tie that would lead to 
continued kindness on the one side, and respect and grateful 
recollections on the other. Any plan of emancipation, how- 
ever gradual it might be, would be better than perpetual 
slavery ; but surely it is the great desideratum of any plan, 
that it leave the parties friends, as freemen. None will 
effect this, which is not founded on Christian principle — and 
there can be none, so far as I am enabled to see, which so 
fully recognizes Christian principle as its basis, as that which 
urges immediate emancipation." 

So deeply at this time, which was about ten years ago, 
w r as his mind interested in the whole subject of slavery, that, 
to use his own words, " he read almost every work he could 
lay his hands on ; talked much of it in public and in private. 
In the month of May, 1S34, he became so fully convinced 
of the right of his slaves to their freedom, and of his dvtt/ as 
a Christian to give it them, that he prepared, say on the first 
day of June, a deed of emancipation for the six that he 
brought with him from Alabama, and had it duly entered 
on record in the office of the County Court of the county in 
which he lived. They all remained with him, receiving such 
wages — with the exception of a little girl — as were custom- 
ary in the country." For this " deed of emancipation," 
beautifully evincing his deep sincerity and thorough hon- 
esty, Mr. Birney was far enough from claiming applause. 
It was in his view a simple act of justice. 

Just here, a few words from a paper of Mr. Birney al- 
ready referred to, will be read with profit and delight. 
" There would be no danger of personal violence to the 
master from emancipation, brought about by Christian be- 
nevolence. Such an apprehension is the refuge of conscious 
guilt. Emancipation, brought about on the principle above 
mentioned, I hesitate not to say, would, in most instances, 



LIFE OF B1RNEY. 25 

where the superior intelligence of the master was acknowl- 
edged, produce on the part of the beneficiaries, the most 
entire and cordial reliance on his counsel and friendship. 
I do not believe that I have any warmer friends than my man- 
umitted slaves — none, lam sure, if sacrifices were called for, 
who would not freely make them, to jrromote my hapjnness. 

" The injustice which the slave feels as done him in taking 
the avails of his labor, leads him to take clandestinely what 
he persuades himself he is entitled to. He has comparative- 
ly no character to lose, no ultimate object for the attainment 
of which the building up of a good character would contri- 
bute. As a freeman, character would be essential — his earn- 
ings would be his — his wife, his children would be his ; the 
apprehension of forcible separation would depart, and he 
would have every motive that ordinarily influences men to 
build up a good name for worth and honesty. The depre- 
dations on the master's property by slaves, I should suppose, 
are tenfold what they would be by the same slaves made 
freemen. 

" The slaves, if emancipated on any terms, would be able 
to provide for themselves and their families. If they should 
be kindly treated by their former masters, and Christian be- 
nevolence should make the same efforts for their improve- 
ment, that are made in many places for the improvement of 
the distant heathen — they would not only provide for them- 
selves, but with such opportunities become good citizens. 
I have made frequent inquiry as to the number of paupers 
among the colored people of Kentucky, amounting to nearly 
five thousand — I have, as yet, heard of but one. I think it 
is a rare thing, so far as I have had opportunity of observ- 
ing, in slave States, to see free colored persons arraigned in 
courts, to answer to criminal accusations. My own manu- 
mitted slaves, at the end of the first year of their employment 
on wages, will have used but half the amount they are to receive. 
They have not fallen into disorderly or vagrant habits <; but 
have manifested — at least the younger ones — an increased de- 
sire for knowledge, and for attendance on the Sabbath-schools, 
and the common ministrations of the sanctuary. To delay 
emancipation, in order to attain the greatest good it is be- 
lieved will result from it, is, in my judgment, but to accu- 
mulate the difficulties now in the way, and to delay to a 
remoter period its full consummation. 

" Having emancipated my slaves from a fill conviction that 
the bondage in which I was holding them was sinful, I con- 
ceive I have no greater right to ask for compensation from 



2(5 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

any quarter, than I would have in any other case, where a sim- 
ilar conviction would lead me to return to my neighbor any 
%>ropcrty to which he had an unquestionable right, and which 
I by superior power had withheld from him. The claim of 
1 compensation,' it seems to me, can be fairly sustained, only 
on the ground that slaveholding is not sinful. Would not 
the Ephesian converts, who at once abandoned their 'curious 
arts,' and burned the ' books' which contained instructions 
in them, have been as equitably entitled to compensation as 
the slaveholder, who abandons a ]^'operty equally condemned 
by God's law, and commits to the flames the charter by 
which he has hitherto supported his groundless claims 2" 

Mr. Birney had now reached ground where he could stand 
erect, and speak with a man's voice. He could not be in- 
active. The doctrine of Immediate Emancipation, cordial- 
ly embraced, and decisively acted on, had shed light and 
peace and joy through his spirit. Its influence upon him 
and upon his slaves was equally renovating and refreshing. 
Both them and him it raised to the dignity and power of 
genuine manhood. And the benefits he had thus received 
he would freely impart — impart to all within the sphere of 
his influence. His exertions were vigorous and untiring to 
convince his fellow citizens, on the right hand and on the 
left, of the sin of slaveholding — to persuade them to unite 
with him in subserving the cause of Holy Freedom. He 
went from place to place — he visited family after family, to 
collect fit materials for an anti-slavery society. A few lis- 
tened to his voice. A Buchanan and a Munsell bravely 
came to his assistance ; and claimed a share in the privile- 
ges he enjoyed, and the sufferings he endured. At length, 
a small anti-slavery society was organized. 

To bring the Press, moreover, into the service of enslaved 
Humanity, Mr. Birney exerted himself promptly and reso- 
hitely. He made arrangements for publishing the Philan- 
thropist in Kentucky. About this time, the affair at Vicks- 
burg occurred, with its wide- spread alarm and horrible atro- 
cities. The fear of a servile insurrection agitated the com- 
munity where Mr. Birney resided. The slaveholders there 
were intent on preventing the publication of the Philanthro- 
pist. They employed persuasion — they " breathed out 
threatenings." But Mr. Birney was not to be deterred by 
the one, or dissuaded by the other. The rights to which he 
was entitled, he calmly" assented. For the discharge of the 
duties to which he was Heaven-summoned, he cheerfully 
and resolutely girded up his loins. His kindred and friends 



LITE OF BIRNEY. 27 

marked with deep apprehension the perils which were thick- 
ening around. With " many entreaties they besought him" 
to abandon the position he had undertaken to maintain. 
But " deadly imminent breach" though it was, he could not 
retire. Nor did he relinquish the design, till he found that 
his printer could not be persuaded to fulfill his engagements. 
And he could not, in the circumstances he was placed in, 
persuade another to come to his assistance. And as he was 
resolved on publishing the Philanthropist, he must, of course, 
as he did, leave Kentucky. So far as the welfare of the 
slave was concerned, it made indeed no great difference on 
which" side of the Ohio river the press went into operation. 

Just at this point, a strong light is shed upon the Man 
and his position, by the following statements, taken from a 
paper which we can not help ascribing to the powerful, pol- 
ished and faithful pen of Prof. Wright. " In the prospectus 
he said : * Those who have investigated it (slavery) with one 
consent declare, if something effectual be not done without 
any delay, it will become in a short time unmanageable, and 
in the end overwhelming. In our condition, to do nothing 
would show an unpardonable lack of manhood. Something 
effectual ought to be — for as yet it can be done. With the 
sin of slavery, its evils may be terminated ; our land may be 
blessed of God ; raised up; cleansed from defilement, and, 
without a single remaining blood-spot, stand clothed in the 
majesty of her free principles, the rebuke of tyrants, the 
refuge of the oppressed.' 

" The paper was to maintain the duty of immediate eman- 
cipation, among other reasons, ' Because it (slavery) is the 
mighty barrier — resisting the progress of pure religion in 
the slaveholding States : 

u * Because Slaver?/, the institution of man, is opposed to 
Liberty, the institution of God. In a contest with the Al- 
mighty, we must be overthrown. ' Who hath hardened 
himself against Him, and hath prospered V ' 

" On the 12th of July, thirty-three of the citizens of Dan- 
ville addressed a letter to Mr. Birney, remonstrating against 
the proposed establishment of the paper. They said : 

" ' We address you now in the calmness and candor that 
should characterize law-abiding men, as willing to avoid 
violence as they are determined to meet extremity, and ad- 
vise you of the peril that must, and inevitably will attend the 
execution of your purpose. .... We propose to you to 
postpone the setting up of your press, and the publication 
of your paper, until application can be had to the Legisla- 



28 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

ture, who will by a positive law set rules for your observ- 
ance, or by a refusal to act, admonish us of our duty. We 
admonish you, sir, as citizens of the same neighborhood, as 
members of the same society in which you live and move, 
and for whose harmony and quiet we feel the most sincere 
solicitude — to beware how you make an experiment here, 
which no American slaveholdmg community has found itself 
able to bear.' 

" Mr. Birney returned a reply, refusing, in respectful, yet 
dignified and decided terms, to comply with their request. 
He suggested that it would have been far more becoming, 
and more like the spirit of ' law-abidiug men,' had they ' ab- 
stained entirely from the threat that a resort might be had to 
violence, to prevent the exercise of one of the most precious 
rights of an American — a right which however it might be 
violated in the destruction of his property, or cloven down 
in the abuse of his person, can never for a moment be sur- 
rendered.' He, therefore, after giving his reasons, conclu- 
ded, ' However desirous I may be of obliging you, as citi- 
zens and neighbors, I can not accede to your proposition.' 

Before leaving Kentucky, however, Mr. Birney prepared, 
in a " Letter to Ministers and Elders," a compact, strong 
and beautiful argument " on the sin of holding slaves, and 
the duty of immediate emancipation." From this, extracts 
will now be given. 

The following is the plan of Mr. Birney's argument, with 
the particulars under the first division : " I mean rather to 
present : 1. Some of the most prominent characteristics of 
slavery. 2. Some of the excuses of our church for not pu- 
rifying herself from this sin, with answers to them ; and 
3. The consequences to the church and the State at large, 
if she should at once enter upon her duty. The character- 
istics to which I now ask your attention, are — 

" 1. It originated, has always been, and is at this day, 
maintained by a violence that is utterly at variance with the 
mild spirit of the Gospel. 

11 2. It wrests from one set of men, without crime on their 
part, the fruits of their bodily toils, for the support and ease 
of another. 

11 3. Its effects upon its subjects are to stupify and benumb 
the mind, to violate the conscience, to multiply the sins of 
the grossest character, to exclude the knowledge of God and 
Christ, as well as of the necessity of any preparation for the 
world to come, and, of course, to prepare them for hell. 

" 4. Its effects upon those who maintain it, and in some 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 29 

measure upon those who witness and consent to it, are indo- 
lence, diabolical passions, deadness to the claims of justice 
and the calls of mercy, a worldly spirit, and contempt for a 
large portion of our fellow creatures : therefore, as far as 
their qualifications for an eternal state are modified by slave- 
ry, it rather prepares them for the sentence of the damned 
than for the invitation of the blessed. 

" That the above are some, but by no means all of the char- 
acteristics of slavery, no one, with our opportunities of wit- 
nessing the thing itself, will deny. Now, does it not seem 
passing strange, that a ■ monster of such hideous mien,' 
should have been received within the very midst of the 
church of God — that it should find in its bosom its surest 
and softest resting-place — that it should be fondled, sleeked 
and cherished there 1 and that if any one attempt to tear 
him from his lodgment, with one consent all cry out, ' Let 
him alone ! let him alone ! we have become so accustomed 
to his presence, that much of his deformity has been taken 
away, and we can not do without him ; we are preparing 
him for his discharge, which, as he is slow to learn, he will 
probably be ready for, in some hundred or two years ; then 
he can be dismissed without injury to any one concerned ; 
but don't disturb him now ; he is very quiet, all things are 
going on well. Make what preparation you please for his 
Juture dismission ; but by no means touch him at this time. 
The church ! the church / you'll endanger the church, and 
make it more unpopular than it now is. I charge you, wait 
for a ' more convenient season.' God is opening the way 
for his discharge in his own good time. If you attempt it 
now, you will not only utterly fail, because all the church 
will be against you ; and besides, they will call you, and 
join with those who are without in calling you, a madman 
and a fanatic — and your influence will be destroyed.' This 
is no caricature ; it is solemn, serious truth ; should it be 
denied, there are ■ clouds of witnesses' to prove it. But to 
return." 

Under the second division, how impressive and refreshing 
is the following answer to the allegation that *' Paul and 
Peter establish, or recognize as established, the relation of 
master and servant, (slave,) when they give admonition to 
both as to their reciprocal behavior. It is very certain that 
this would not have been done, they being holy and inspired 
men, if the relation itself was sinful ; or if there was any 
thing in the subjection of one human being to the will and 
caprice of another, that was forbidden by God's law. Now 



3(3 LIFT OF BIRNEY. 

if the word 'servant' be used by Peter and Paul to mean 
' slaves' exclusively — a meaning I admit only that the excuse 
may have all the force it can claim — their exhortation, to 
persons in this condition amounts to no more than what had 
been impressed before upon all who were, or might become, 
the victims of injustice or oppression, to hear it patient///. 
It was given with the same object, and in the same spirit, 
as the command of the Savior himself, that the persecuted 
should pray for their persecutors. Had it beeu a common evil 
during the ministry of Paul and Peter to which Christians 
were exposed, to be cast into prison by the lawless power 
of individual persecutors, would the exhortations of thes'3 
apostles to them to bear their sufferings with resignation 
and meekness, establish or recognize as established the re- 
lation of persecutor and persecuted ] or authorize Chris- 
tians to exercise grievous oppressions upon one another, or 
upon such of the heathen as they might be able to circum- 
vent and bring into their power ? Or when- Paul, through 
Titus, admonishes his brethren to be ' subject to principal- 
ities and powers, and to obey magistrates,' does he in the 
slightest manner sanction the imperia-1 atrocities of a Nero> 
a Domitian, or any of their legitimate successors until now 1 
I know you will say he does not ; and that he would have 
condemned in the conduct of those tyrants towards their 
obscurest subjects whatever was inconsistent with the great 
and universally binding law, • Thou shalt do unto others as 
ye would that they should do unto you.' If then Nero, for 
example, had submitted to the Gospel that Paul proclaimed 
in his capital, and become an obedient disciple of the apos- 
tles — although he might have retained the power and author- 
ity of an emperor, yet his oppressions, his cruelties, would 
have ceased, the very temper that prompted them would 
have been suppressed, his power would have besn put forth 
for good, not for evil, and he would have been seen a prince 
dispensing justice in mercy, and finding his own happiness 
in that which he daily scattered over a grateful people. 
Would he under Paul's discipline have seized upon the 
poor, the weak, the defenceless of his empire, that he might, 
exact from them toil unrequited during their whole lives, 
and consign them, and their innocent children after them,, 
to social and civil degradation in the midst of happy mil- 
lions — to personal bondage — to mental darkness — to tho 
power of vice and the dominion of sin — to hopelessness in 
this world — to shame and everlasting contempt in that which 
k to come 1. Or had the converting grace of God found 



LIFE OF BTRN'EY. * SI 

him acting the bloody and relentless tyrant, and thus fulfill- 
inrr his relation to the oppressed, would he, Paul being his 
teacher, have continued it during his life 1 And not con- 
tent with this, would he — calling upon Paul to indite his 
last will and- testament — have perpetuated by legacy to his 
issue this continually crrowing mass of blood and groans — of 
misery and tears I But let us come down from the tyrant 
over millions to his miniature — brandishing the sceptre of 
his authority over some half dozen of his fellow creatures, 
and see hosv the matter stands. You insist that Paul re- 
cognized — that is acknowledged to be right — the relation 
of master and servant among his cotemporaries ; ; of course, 
that it could not have- been wrong thcv, when tested by the 
great principles of man's duty to his fellow man, preached 
by him in his own time, and which we consider as preached 
to all persons since. The inference you would deduca from 
these premises — one which is unavoidable — is, that as- these 
principles can never change., as they were intended for the 
direction of men in all time r (to say nothing of eternity,) this 
relation, then right, must be so now. This I believe is a fair 
statement of the position assumed-, on tins passage* by the 
scriptural advocate for continued slavery. Admitting: all 
the premises to be true, the conclusion to which you^have 
come, would be altogether undeniable ;. and we would be 
authorized now to inflict on our fellow men, white or black, 
who might be reduced into our power, all the enormities of 
Roman or Grecian slavery. 

" But there is an essential part of your premises — the ap- 
probation of Paul of the injustice and cruelty of the master, 
covered up under the very comprehensive word relation, 
that I apprehend, is very far from berag maintainable : For- 
if it can be maintained, it must be by. making him nullify all 
those principles of mortal action which he had been unceas- 
ingly inculcating upon his fellow men, and of which he had 
been giving in his own conduct a bright example. For if 
this relation, [in which are to be included all the. atrocious 
powers conferred by the Roman laws in the time of Paul; 
as well as the powers, not much less atrocious, exercised 
in some parts of our own country now,] be right-; it follows 
consequentially, that to do any thing fairly necessary in the 
estimation of the superior in t lie relation, to maintain it, can 
not be wrong. Thus, among the Romans, masters could 
put their slaves to death at pleasure : and it W3s done with, 
great cruelty and frequency ; they kept their slaves chained 
to the door-pc-sts as janitors, they branded them in the fore- 



32 * LIFE OF B1RNEV. 

head, and, if the master was slain at his own house, and the 
murderer undiscovered, all his domestic slaves were liable 
lo be put to death. Under this power, four hundred were 
put to death on a single occasion. Will you drive the apostle 
to a recognition of such horrible deeds ] To an acknowl- 
edgment thai they were right ] That there was in them no 
violation of the great law of love \ No : you reply ; this is 
too horrible. I rejoin and say, that you can not then, on 
your own priuciple, charge him with the recognition of any 
violation, how small soever it may seem, of this law. For 
the same purpose, (the maintenance of the relation,) it may 
be thought necessary by masters among us, to keep back 
the hire of the laborers who reap down their fields, (this is 
injustice) — that if a slave, in obedience to the very consti- 
tution of man's nature, when eelf-interest, the mainspring 
of action, is taken from him, become indolent, — if he be 
reluctant to spend gratuitously for another that property 
which the great Author of his being has given him in his- 
own physical powers, in his own bones and muscles and 
sinews — he may be beaten and scourged to any extern-, 
however cruel, till this indolence, this reluctance to an un- 
requited transfer of his labor to another, this natural ten- 
dency to self-indulgence, be overcome. (This is oppres- 
sion.) To the same end it may be necessary, in the opin- 
ion of the master, in order to derive that profit from the 
relation, which only makes it worthy to be maintained, that 
marriages among his slaves be discouraged, and a gross 
state of concubinage permitted ; that the wife be torn at 
midnight from the man of her love, and her screaming chil- 
dren wrung from her frantic grasp ; that the husband find 
his manly arms, intended for the protection of his helpless 
offspring, bound in the weighty and sure fetters of the south- 
ern slaver ; and the last, the sole atom of earthly happiness 
they were all enjoying, cast upon the winds. This is cruel- 
ty unmixed — and to justify it, you bring the noble-minded 
apostle who suffered persecutions without number, distress 
and death, that he might bring men to love one another ! ! ! 
" Further : It might be that the whole life of a master 
would be passed in the perpetration of injustice, the exer- 
cise of cruelty and oppression ; that a relation might be 
perpetuated whose substance is the aliment of the most 
overbearing despotism on the one part, and the vilest ab- 
jectness on the other. If the sins that may be said to be 
inherent in slavery — if injustice, cruelty and oppression 
were habitually committed against persons not in the rela- 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 33 

(ion, and unrepented of, the perpetrator, by the judgment 
of all men, would be damned for ever — if they were com- 
mitted against our white ■ neighbors,' a furnace as hot as Ne- 
buchadnezzar's would be too cool for them. Yet, notwith- 
standing his character may, by the indulgence of the worst 
passions against his slaves, have become as mean, as vicious, 
as degraded, and as unfit for the society of the just made 
perfect, as if he had indulged them against free persons, and 
his equals in society ; because, forsooth, his slaves are in the 
relation, there seems to be no harm done, and at his death 
he is taken up to heaven, where all this treatment of his 
slaves, they being in the relation, goes for nothing. Thus it 
would appear that Paul and Peter, after exhorting men to 
do all — even to their eating and drinking — for the glory of 
God — to be holy in all manner of conversation, are found 
supporting a relation whose sole object is, on the one side 
temporary convenience, at the expense of personal degrada- 
tion on the other, and the moral pollution of both — whose 
universal tendencies upon the parties concerned, and upon 
society at large, have been mischievous, polluting and unholy. 
To these apostles I do not think can fairly be attributed such 
miserable logic to support such miserable morals. 

" For further illustration : suppose that during the minis- 
try of Paul, a Christian slave at Colosse, thinking himself 
treated in an unchristian manner by his Christian master, 
had brought his case before the church whilst Paul was on 
a visit to that city. He would alledge against his master, 
that instead of giving him, as Paul had directed, what was 
just and equal for his services, he gave him nothing but his 
food and clothing, and these in many instances adjusted to 
his wants with the most scrupulous nicety : that his • threat- 
enings' were many, and his scourgings not a few. The mas- 
ter may be supposed to have admitted all the facts of the 
case, and to have justified himself in such words as these : 
'As to the command to give my slave what is just and equal, 
I have never interpreted it to mean what the standard of 
justice among equals would require ; but rather that I should 
give him just what suited my convenience ; and as to giving 
him what is equal, or, as he understands it, a fair equivalent 
•for his services, it never once entered my head — for I might 
as well have no slave at all as to do this; indeed he would, 
if this be the meaning of it, soon be as free as I am. And as 
to the threatenings and scourgings that I have bestowed upon 
him, his own insolent claims, now reiterated — have jn.-*ly 
provoked them : they are absolutely necessary to keep him 

D 



31 LIFE OF BIRXEY. 

bumble and obedient, make him know his place, and to per- 
petuate the relation which you yourself have recognized, and 
know, ought by all means to be maintained.' What now do 
you think Paul would have done, after hearing such a ha- 
rangue as this ? Would he have sent tor the Phrygian slave 
coda, have collated the laws, and heard testimony as to all 
the recognized and approved customs of oppression ] Or 
would he have taken up the word of God, the perfect law 
of liberty, and quoted to him, ' in all things whatsoever ye 
would that men should do unto you, do ye even so unto ikemV 
Brethren, if such a case were brought before you, how would 
you decide 1 — By the laws and customs of slavery, as they 
exist in Kentucky, or by the hook of God? If by the latter, 
what becomes of slavery '. It is shivered to atoms." 

In dwelling on the natural consequences of immediate 
emancipation, Mr. Birney uttered words, to which one de- 
lights to listen. Take the following as a specimen. "But 
if we set our slaves free among us, they will turn round and 
cut our throats. This would be bad enough truly. But do 
you entertain any serious apprehension of such a result ] 
For if you do, I shall be compelled to attribute it. either to 
conscious guilt for bad treatment of your slaves, or to a total 
want of manhood. We have succeeded thus far in keeping 
in subjection this people, whilst committing against them the 
greatest trespass that man can commit against his fellow, 
whilst withholding from them rights for which men in all 
ages have hazarded life, fortune and honor; and yet, when 
we restore those rights peaceably and kindly, it is most 
stoutly maintained that they to whom they are restored will 
turn and rend us. This is surely unsound philosophy — alto- 
gether at variance with the laws of mind, as well as with 
historical facts. For I am very sure that those who insist 
upon the objection may safely be challenged to produce a 
single well-authenticated instance to show, that dangerous 
or even inconvenient consequences have followed the sudden 
emancipation of large bodies of slaves. Now I am by no 
means so sanguine as to indulge the belief that in emanci- 
pation will be found a pandpea for all the ills that flesh is 
heir to; but that they will ultimately be immeasurably di- 
minished by it, I can not for one moment doubt. And I 
wish ir always borne in mind, whilst we are discussing that 
part of the subject which relates to the expediency of eman- 
cipation, that it is not the introduction of a new and untried 
evil, where none of kindred character existed previously; 
but that it is the substitution of an evil, in the opinion of its 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 35 

advocates, light and transient when compared with the evil 
of slavery, whose ultimate tendency, in the judgment of all 
considerate men, who have weighed it, is to crush us. 

" Now to every one of you who is a slaveholder, and in 
whose mind exists an apprehension of the danger predicted 
in the objection, I am hold to offer some means of defense 
from all harm. Say, you have become convinced that slave- 
ry, as it exists among us, is a sin before God ; that you have 
repented of your own guilt in this matter, and are now anx- 
ious to show fruits that consist with repentance ; you sum- 
mon before you your servants — the fathers and mothers, and 
such others of them as may be old enough to understand an 
explanation of the principles on which you are about to act : 
you say to them, you have become convinced that the bonds 
in which you have held them are inconsistent with the law 
of love to our neighbor, enjoined by God upon every man, 
and that moved by the sacred authority of the religion you 
profess, you have determined to continue the sin no longer. 
With this you read and then deliver to them, accurately au- 
thenticated deeds of manumission for themselves and their 
children. You further say to them, ' As I have already given 
to you the most convincing proof I can furnish of my friend- 
ship, it is not my intention to push you out of my doors, 
desiring never to see you again — exposed to the impositions 
of a world with whose business you are in a great measure 
unacquainted, or to the prejudices and scorn of such as 
cherish for you no kind sympathy ; no, if you choose to re- 
main in my employment, I will pay you what is just and 
equal, a fair equivalent for your services. I will continue 
to feel for you the love, and extend to you the conduct of a 
Christian; I will assist you in providing the means of edu- 
cating your children for usefulness in life, and should you 
so choose, in binding them out to profitable trades and em- 
ployments ; and I. will be your sure and steadfast friend, and 
your protector so long as your conduct shall not render it 
improper for me to be so.' I ask you, now, if after doing 
this, and kneeling down with them at the footstool of God's 
throne to thank him for the Christian courage he has bestow- 
ed upon you, and to implore his blessing upon the down 
trodden and the poor, in their new estate, you would fear 
the names of the incendiary, or the knife of the assassin \ 
Hateful as is to many the very name of abolition, here it is 
in its essence — and its safety is sure, because it is the off- 
spring and the exhibition of benevolence. 

" Well, after all this you say, ' What can we do V I 



36 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

answer, you can rise up to-morrow and liberate all you hold 
in bondage. ' But,' you reply, ' what effect would this have 
upon the great body of slaveholders in the State V I will 
undertake to affirm, that by such a course, small as is your 
number, you have crucified the giant sin of our land ; his 
dying struggles may be fierce and long protracted, but his 
dissolution will be certain, because the death-blow will have 
been given. The ministers and rulers of any of the larger 
denominations of Christians have it in their power to-morrow 
to give the fatal wound to slavery in Kentucky — and if in 
Kentucky, throughout the slaveholding region of the Union 
for how would the congregations over whom God has placed 
them, and upon whom they would then be authorized to 
press this subject with all its overpowering weight, upon 
sound consciences and Christian hearts, stand in the blaze 
of such virtuous action, and not be consumed or won by it? 
If it were to prevail among Presbyterians alone, how long 
could the other denominations hold their fellow men in bond- 
age ] Not twelve months, as I honestly believe. If then 
you will come up to the next Synod, after having 'loosed 
the bands of wickedness, undone the heavy burdens, let the 
oppressed go free, and broken every yoke,' so far as you are 
concerned, you have the promise of the Lord that ■ your 
light shall break forth as the morning, and your health spring 
forth speedily; that your righteousness shall go before you, 
and the glory of the Lord be your rereward.' You may, it is 
true, be called madmen ; but Paul was so called before you. 
You may be called fanatics, fools and knaves ; but Sharpe, 
Clarkson and Wilberforce were so baptized by the enemies 
of humanity ; you may at first obtain but little honor from 
men ; but you will win an eternal weight of glory from God. 
That you may be influenced by Him so to act, is the earnest 
desire of your friend and brother." 

About this time, the spirit and movements of Mr. Birney, 
as the friend of Freedom, began to attract the attention and 
rouse the animosity of his old neighbors and acquaintance 
in Alabama. They held a public meeting, described as 
" large and respectable," in which, as a basis for a number 
of foolish and wicked resolutions, they adopted a preamble 
drenched in falsehood and absurdity. They affect to look 
with a kind of horror upon those who " live upon the labor 
of others," as if this were not a prominent feature of their 
own character ! With unblushing effrontery, such as only 
the adroit villain could exhibit, they ns.-ociate the name of 
Mr. Birney and his coadjutors with those of certain black- 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 37 

le^s and gamblers, whom they proposed to visit with terrible 
inflictions. " The sole and avowed object of Mr. Birney and 
his friends, they declare, is to sow the seed of discord, rapine 
and murder among the slaves of the South." These fervent 
and determined patriots, therefore, appoint a vigilance com- 
mittee, to inflict blows and death upon the objects of their 
vengeance, whenever they may lay their lawless hands 
upon them. Of this committee, more than one-third were 
described as professed Christians, belonging to three of the 
leading denominations in our country, one of whom was a 
Baptist minister. It is very difficult in the way of riot to do 
mischief with a desperate hand, and on a large scale, espe- 
cially in opposing the cause of Freedom, without the coun- 
tenance and assistance of some baptized mountebank, of 
some heartless religionists. And such can easily be found 
almost any where in our country, where a Christianity pre- 
vails, which can apologize for slavery. 

The assault thus made on him, Mr. Birney repelled 
with manly indignation and conscious power, which it doe3 
one good to peruse. There he stands, calm, erect, self- 
possessed. Hear him. " Gentlemen, — A number of the 
Alabama Watchman, containing the foregoing account of 
the proceedings of a ' public meeting,' lately held at Athens, 
has reached me, enveloped as newspapers usually are, when 
sent by mail. An extra of that journal, containing a dupli- 
cate account of the same proceedings, carefully enclosed in 
a blank wrapper, sealed, and charged with a double rate of 
postage, (unpaid,) has also been sent to me and received. 
All this care, to convey speedy and authentic information of 
the notice you have been pleased to take of one who had 
little reason to expect such conspicuity as you have given 
him, it is to be presumed, has been exercised by your agen- 
cy and direction. In this reply, which, after no hurried re- 
flection, I have thought proper to make to your proceedings, 
I shall take but little time in noticing what was done that is 
strictly personal to myself. I will stop only long enough to 
remind you — especially that portion of you who profess to 
be followers of Christ — of the unjust impression you have 
attempted to make on those to whom I am a stranger, by 
associating me, in your proceedings, with 'gamblers, black- 
legs, and suspicious persons.' It is well known to you all, 
that with laborious diligence I prosecuted in your county, 
and with no mean success, a profession, arduous in its duties, 
and, to a conscientious mind, beset with difficulties and 
temptations. To the generousness of my practice, the bar 



38 life of Burner. 

will testify, and, with parties and witnesses, bear record of 
my exemption from the petty tricks and advantages which 
bring the profession into disrepute. Knowing me, by an 
acquaintance of many years, as you did — in my profession — 
as a member of the church — as a citizen — you have tried to 
produce an impression that you knew to be unjust and injurious. 
As Christians and as gentlemen — now that you have had 
time for reflection — you should be sorry for it, and ashamed 
of it." 

Again, " Nor, do I believe, hateful as is the very name of 
abolitionists to slaveholders, that you would refuse to mingle 
your sympathies with theirs, for the oppressed of other lands. 
In all our South, the tyrant Nicholas had not a friend, while 
he was drenching his hands in the blood of his Polish sub- 
jects, goaded by oppression to revolt. No : the faintest ray 
of hope for their success in vindicating their liberty, warmed 
your every heart ; the clang of the Polish falchion on the 
invader's casque, made music delightful to your ears ; whilst 
for every blade that was raised by an arm that struck for 
liberty, your silent orisons went up, that it might descend 
with resistless energy upon the strongest of the oppressor's 
bands. Your prayers ascended not for the staying of the 
pestilence, that was sweeping off the thousands of the foe — 
and when, at last, after the struggle of despair, the sun of 
Poland's hope went down in tears of blood, it was followed 
by your tears of sorrow — whilst in mournful sympathy with 
the poet, you exclaimed — 

< Hope for a season bids the world farewell, 
And Freedom shrieked when Slmjeucski fell.' 

" But stay — not so fast : Is it not 'fanatical? thus to suffer 
the honest feelings of your nature to go out for the oppressed 
— and is it not ' incendiary' for you here, to reprobate the 
cruelty of the tyrant, or to commiserate the ailliclions of such 
contemptible ' disturbers of the peace V There are two sides 
to every question. You have not yet heard the high-souled 
and chivalrous Emperor's account of this matter. You 
have not heard from his own lips of the great ' delicacy of 
the subject' — nor have you properly appreciated his 'pecu- 
liar circumstances.' To your furious zeal we may suppose 
him to reply, ' You have forgotten altogether, that however 
wrong might have been the dismemberment of Poland, and 
the first reduction of its inhabitants to political servitude, 
that, now, they had become accustomed to it — that they were 



LIFE OF P.IRXEY. 39 

exceedingly degraded* — totally unqualified fur liberty, many 
of them being Jews, who will neither amalgamate with 
Christians, nor Christians with them — that, therefore, they 
never can be free in their native land — the only wny to ele- 
vate them to a proper sense and enjoyment of freedom, being 
either to transport them to the hospitable and healthy shores 
of Palestine, (which is impossible,) or for me to retain the 
power I now possess over them,* using it of course with a 
merciful discretion, as I have always done, and solely for 
their good ; making them, as it were, candidates for freedom, 
till, some how or other, in the lapse of time, they may be 
inducted into its full fruition.' May it not be, too, you have 
overlooked that most manly and satisfactory of excuses for 
inveterate habits of oppression — that they were introduced 
by his very worthy autocratical ancestors, who, themselves 
being oppressors, had transmitted the fashion to their de- 
scendants, and now, without any agency of his, he had it 
' entailed" 1 on him. Beside, may he not well have urged, that 
his power would be curtailed, his wealth diminished, and his 
princely ease broken in upon, by removing the weight of 
his oppression 1 And stili more fiercely, that the oppressed 
were his * property* — that it .was his own concern — that no 
other people knew any thing about it, or had any interest 
in it — and that, if any canting sympathy for his subjects 
(contented and happy he knew they were, if meddlers would 
let them alone) should be felt and expressed any where ; or, 
if a misguided philanthropy should attempt to convince him, 
that in the stores of heaven there is laid up wrath for the op- 
jDressor — or that it is better, safer, happier, to be served by 
willing subjects than reluctant slaves ; or if his neighbors 
should permit any discussion of the wrongs of tyrants and 
the rights of men, he should regard it as a hostile interfer- 
ence with his own peculiar despotical interests, calling, at 
least, for a withdrawal of his friendship, if not for open war 
upon the guilty. Now, in what light would you look upon 
such pleas as these ? Not, I am sure, as the candid reasons 
of an intelligent and honest mind, desiring to show mercy 
and do justice — but, rather, as the guilty subterfuges of a 
base, and selfish, and cowardly despot, who has the. mean- 
ness to back with threats, his feigned excusos for practising 
an iniquity, he has not the magnanimity to forsake. 

" Thus far, you and the abolitionist ' walk together,' in 
admiring the beauty and comeliness of liberty. But at this 

* ' The peasantry are in a wretched condition, dirty, improvident, iiiikilent, addicted 
to intoxication, and, of course, poor.' 



40 LIFE OF BIRXEY. 

point you separate. He loves her as a substantial good for 
himself, his neighbor, his country, the world : you admire 
her as good in the ' abstract' — or, as having her habitation 
at a distance — in Ireland — in Poland — or in Greece. But 
let her blazing beacon begin to sweep over the Atlantic and 
approach our shores, and its warmth begin to be felt near 
your cotton-bales, your rice-tierces, and your sugar-hogs- 
heads — let but 

England's flag, — 
Proclaim that all around is free, 
From ' farthest Ind' to each blue crag, 
That beetles o'er the western sea ; — 

and, oh, how fanatical! how visionary ! how suicidal to her 
own interests, how destructive to those of the oppressed ! 
and how injurious to "her neighbors ! 

" Now, what a shame is this ! Lovers of freedom, are 
y e ? — ari£ l we ll content that her fires should blaze, and warm 
and purify abroad — whilst at home, they must be extinguish- 
ed, and your own house left desolate and dark ! Lovers of 
liberty, are ye 1 — and yet, whilst the abolitionist is striving 
to uprear her fallen standard in our country, that all the world 
may see its broad folds, waving in the purest air of heaven, 
representing in letters of sunlight, that all men are entitled 
to Liberty — wilh myrmidon bands you rush to seize, that 
you may consume it in the furnace of a sugar-house, or bury 
it forever in the marshes of a rice-field. 

" The importance of the object is by no means diminished*, 
when it is seen how rapidly slavery is insinuating itself into 
the very religion of the American church. Time was — and 
it ended but a little while ago — when slavery was deplored 
in the south, not only as an evil of large dimensions, but as 
a transgression of the great law of love ; which, whilst it 
could not be justified, yet some palliation was found for it, 
in the peculiar circumstances of that portion of the country 
— and a hope often expressed, that, in some way or other, 
it might terminate. No section of the church was then 
found so besotted as to become its advocate and supporter 
on principle, and boldly take God's book of love as their 
warrant for holding their brethren in a bondage, unequalled 
for its enormities even among Mahomedans or Pagans of 
modern times ; nor so reckless of all decent regard to their 
character, as to challenge the praise of men for the meliora- 
ted condition of the enslaved here, as to morals and physical 
comforts, above what it would have been bad they remained 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 41 

in Africa; or to set off against their iniquity the few instan- 
ces of conversion to Christ, by which God, in the greatness 
of his mercy, had chosen to exalt his name, and make it 
glorious, among the down trodden and perishing of a Chris- 
tian land. Yet, all this has been done — not by a few igno- 
rant and iron-hearted slave-driving professors of religion, but 
by the accredited organs of different churches in the South, 
claiming high stations on the scale of general intelligence, 
biblical knowledge and spiritual purity." 

What a terrible rebuke is implied in this pointed de- 
mand : " What has slavery, acting through the South, done 
for the freedom of speech and of the press, those great con- 
servatives of our government 1 I will tell you : She has 
used the refinements of metaphysics and the delusions of 
sophistry to explain away the obvious meaning of constitu- 
tional provisions enacted for their preservation ; she has 
claimed for herself the peculiar favoritism of the Constitu- 
tion of the United States ; she has reared herself aloft on a 
bloody throne, demanding, with lash in hand, of States sove- 
reign as herself, that all their rights should bow in submis- 
sion to her and ' do her reverence ;' that her dignity must 
be regarded as a thing too holy to be handled ; and that 
these common rights of the people be restrained lest her 
sacred mysteries be profaned by men of' unclean lips;' and 
the secret things of her penetralia be exposed by freemen to 
the rude gaze of a vulgar world. 

" What has it done for the security of the citizens under 
the Constitution and laws of the land 1 You shall hear : 
She has mocked at Constitutions and laws ; she has raised 
up tribunals unknown and opposed to them both ; she has 
instituted inquisitions and invested them with power to exe- 
cute punishments, not only of disgrace, but even unto death ; 
she has set aside the trial by jury, and freemen of our coun- 
try have been apprehended on suspicion, and without any 
charge of crime known to the laws, they have been shame- 
fully treated ; they have been ignominiously scourged, as 
slaves are scourged ; and they have been executed on the 
boughs of your trees, whilst the once sacred appeal, ' I am 
an American citizen,' has been drowned by the deafening 
shouts of a law-contemning rabble." 

The charge of hurling denunciations against the slave- 
holders, so often urged against the abolitionists, is thus hap- 
pily disposed of: " But again : the abolitionists call hard 
names that can not be borne. Now, it is very true, and we 
all are witnesses how difficult it is to bear their application 



42 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

to ourselves. Yet they ought not to throw off its centre 
any well-regulated mind. If charged falsely, we should 
most generally disregard it, and lice down the falsehood. 
If truly, we should be admonished (fas est ab hoste docerij 
to reform that part of our life which has brought the bad 
name upon us. Sure it is, if the balance be struck between 
abolitionists and their opposers, the latter will be found to 
have overpaid them, in an amount so great, and in a coin so 
pure, and so thoroughly unadulterated with the alloy of mod- 
eration, or respect, or restraint, that its repayment must be 
utterly and forever despaired of. However, to a brief an- 
swer to the objection. 

41 There were, doubtless, in the days of Paul, a class of men 
well described as 'men-stealers.' The Mediterranean, and 
the smaller seas connected with it, were greatly infested by 
pirates, an important branch of whose business was man- 
Healing. Whenever they were able to overpower a village 
or settlement, and near the coast, they seized on the inhab- 
itants, reduced them to bonds, and sold them in other lands 
for slaves. So formidable had they become in the time of 
Pompey the great, that his eulogist, Cicero, in one of his 
most labored and eloquent orations, makes it ground of hi oh 
praise, in recounting Pompey 's merits as a commander, that 
lie had conducted to a fortunate conclusion the j) irat ic.al war. 
It may have been to such piratical man-stealers that the 
apostle especially referred. It is true, he does not mention 
as a class, distinct from the actual kidnappers, those who be- 
came the purchasers, and the holders, and users, through 
life, of their fellow men thus reduced to bondage. We are 
left to conjecture as to the probability that his bold and hon- 
est mind did not discern any real difference, and that he had 
not penetrated to the prevailing distinction of our more en- 
lightened age, which makes such wide discrimination be- 
tween the guilt of the original captors and that of the very 
unfortunate gentlemen on whom the ' email' has fallen. 
He may have thought as you would, in a case where one of 
your half- fed negroes breaks into your meat-house at mid- 
night, ami after satisfying his present hunger, sella the sur- 
plus spoil to an unworthy white neighbor — the latter knowing 
that the meat was stole//. Here, you hesitate not to stigma- 
tize the purchaser, by the same name you would use in de- 
scribing the actual rOgue, and to assign to him, as worthy of 
it, disgrace and punishment proportioned to the elevation of 
his intelligence above that of (he slave. Yet, he was not the 
Chief- — he only took, retained, and used — and this, in all prob- 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 43 

ability, too, after having paid for it — property stolen from 
its rightful owner. But no one would be thought unchari- 
table under any code of ethics with which I am acquainted, 
who should, in speaking of the purchaser, as connected with 
this transaction, describe him as a thief, or his children as 
thieves, if they were to permit the stolen property to be 
* entailed' on them, or to use it as their own with a full 
knowledge of the circumstances under which it was intro- 
duced into the family. And for this very simple reason — 
the moral turpitude contracted is as great in the one case as 
in the other ; the circumstances of their offences differ, but 
the subject-matter, the substance of them is the same. How- 
ever necessary it may be for the purposes of judicial inves- 
tigation to make a distinction in describing the two offences 
— in morals there is none called for ; they are both thieves of 
the same grade. 

" Will you not find it difficult on applying the same moral 
code to the man-stealer and the man-buyer, to amve at a 
different conclusion as to their comparative guilt ? I will 
merely state the case, leaving you to make the application. 
A poor sans culotte heathen prince, on the coast of Africa — 
say for instance, ' King Joe Harris,' or ' Long Peter,' with 
some fifty or sixty followers in the same trim with their liege 
lords, as to their outward man, inflamed with rum, bedazzled 
by a few beads and trinkets ; equipped with musket, powder 
and ball, pike and cutlass, purchased by the slaver at a 
neighboring colony, sets upon his unsuspecting neighbors in 
the dead of night — kills the old and the resisting ; over- 
powers the weak, and delivers them in chains to their insti- 
gator ; he, to the civilized, the educated, the enlightened 
American, who, within the sound of the bell that calls him 
to hear God's messages of woe — if they were but preached 
— against the oppressor of his brother — buys, retains, and 
uses for his own advantage, well knowing the manner in 
which the spoil came into the slaver's hands. Now, tell me, 
where, in morals, is the difference in amount of guilt '/ Does 
the greater lie on the untaught African, or on the refined 
American? — Shall the heathen be denounced as the man- 
stealer — the intermediate agents have heaped on him all the 
foul names that language can forge, whilst he who consum- 
mates the whole transaction, without whom the plunder of 
his fellow-man could not be continued a single year, is look- 
ed upon as entitled to our most delicate regards, our tender- 
est sympathies ; in fine, as a very unfortunate, yet as a very 
interesting and Christian gentleman ] Is this the judgment 



44 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

according to God's standard ] I speak as unto wise men — 
judge ye." 

On the reluctance of the South to discuss the subject of 
slavery, Mr. Birney suggests the following thoughts, well 
worthy of the attention of the thousands whom they so vital- 
ly concern : " A few words more, and I have done. The 
South say, they will have no argument on the subject of 
slavery. Why not ] Does it not concern them % Do they 
not understand it? Have they nothing to lose by a wrong, 
and nothing to save by a right decision ] Has a dogged sul- 
lenness beset them — and do they suppose that this will arrest 
the inquisition now making by the people of this nation into 
this abuse inveterated by two hundred years of disgraceful 
duration 1 Strange resolve ! Strange expectation ! Per- 
sisted in, nothing could furnish stronger evidence of that 
dementation in a community, which, it is said, is the forerun- 
ner of its destruction. Already is the subject of slavery 
infixed on the minds of the American people. Ha ret lethalis 
arundo — you might as well command the lungs not to inhale 
the surrounding atmosphere for which nature made them, 
and by whose inspirations they perform their functions, as 
the public mind not to welcome a discussion, so well fitted 
to call forth its energies and engage its noblest powers. 
Neither Southern legislation, dictated by passion and written 
in blood — nor yet its most faithful execution — any more than 
the brickbats and bludgeons and city mobs of the North, can 
exclude it. A decision ivill be made — it is with you to make 
it one of tremendous calamity — to yourselves ; or one which 
shall raise this whole nation from her dishonorable dust, and 
show her to the world clothed in the garments of love, and 
honor, and mercy, and truth. Come, then, and like men, 
gird yourselves for the contest, and let it be one of reason 
and of mind — not of passion and abuse. On you, especially, 
devolves the duty of aiding in the investigation. You have 
an inexhaustible store of facts — you profess, alone, to under- 
stand it, and make light of the pretensions of others. You 
ban not escape the guilt of a refusal. I invite you, without 
cost, to the use of the Philanthropist. Through its columns 
your voice may be raised, and your arguments carried to the 
remotest corner of the land." 

After finding it impracticable to publish the Philanthropist 
in Kentucky, Mr. Birney went for that purpose to Cincin- 
nati. He might well presume that in a free State, the voice 
of Freedom would be welcomed — would be responded to 
by a thousand faithful echoes. But how greatly was he not 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 45 

mistaken ! " Judge," he exclaims, " of our astonishment, 
when, on the occurrence of a very trivial circumstance, in 
which we had no agency, and almost before we had made 
an orderly adjustment of our domicil, we were waited on by 
an official gentleman, and assured that the issue in Cincin- 
nati, of a paper favorable to emancipation, would produce 
an explosion of mobocratic elements, more violent and des- 
tructive than had been known before ; so much so, that any 
attempt on the part of the city authority to suppress or res- 
train it, would be altogether useless and unavailing ; for, 
that respectable and influential men, such as might be relied 
on to aid in arresting a riotous outbreak from any other 
cause, would in this case, encourage it by their silence and 
acquiescence, if respect for themselves should prevent them 
from actual cooperation with the mob." Without entire 
confidence in this assurance, he thought there might be 
something in it; and as a sacrifice to peace, he concluded 
to issue the Philanthropist for a time at New Richmond, 
some twenty miles from Cincinnati. He ought not, howev- 
er, to have expected any benefit from such a movement. 
The spirit of slavery had pervaded the whole body politic 
and poisoned every drop of blood in its veins. It was every 
where easily aroused and full of rancor and malignity. The 
triple headed dog, that guards the gate of Hell, could not 
bark more furiously or bite more virulently. The sympa- 
thy, which binds a gang of dark and bloody conspirators to- 
gether, has always united in a dreadful league the tools of 
tyranny. These in the game, in which they have staked 
their all, play into each other's hands, eagerly and desper- 
ately. In a struggle with creatures, who are so dead to all 
the claims of decency and manliness ; who trample so ruth- 
lessly upon the rights of others ; who have "sold themselves 
to work iniquity," no compromise on the part of true men 
can be of the least avail. You must come down to their 
low level; and become as vicious and degraded and misera- 
ble as themselves, or they will continue to hate and persecute 
you. You must, therefore, give up the contest or beard the 
monster in his den. No man had a better right to live in 
Cincinnati than Mr. Birney, and to live there as editor of the 
Philanthropist. Of this, his adversaries were well aware. 
A hair of his head they knew they could not touch, without 
playing the tyrant. And this they had resolved to do, come 
what might; and Mr. Birney could not well hope long to 
escape the threatened onset by yielding to their violence so 
far as to issue the Philanthropist at New Richmond. So far 



46 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

as the habit of basely bowing to Southern domination was 
concerned, Cincinnati was much like the rest of Ohio - y 
and whereever it might ring its appalling tocsin, it might 
reckon on sympathy and aid in putting down the spirit of 
Freedom. No sooner had the Philanthropist made its ap- 
pearance, than a Kentucky editor through his journal ex- 
claimed : " We have no doubt that his office will be torn 
down, but we trust that Mr. B. will receive no personal 
harm. Notwithstanding his mad notions, we consider him 
an honest and benevolent man. He is resolute too." Ay, 
resolute, undoubtedly. And this noble trait of character a 
Kentuckian could hardly help respecting, however it might 
be regarded by the craven spirit of Ohio. 

Presently a great meeting was drawn together in Cincin- 
nati, to prevent the friends of Freedom from wielding either 
there or in the vicinity the energies of the press in its ser- 
vice. The editor of the Philanthropist must be taught to 
bow his neck to the yoke which the insolence of the- £outh 

had fastened on his unresisting neighbors. But the follow- 
er o 

ing words of Mr. Birney, uttered at this time, show that he 
was not quite prepared to receive the lesson which, they 
stood ready impudently to force upon him. " The contin- 
ued indisposition of Mrs. B., and the management of the Phi- 
lanthropist, keep me near home. But, sir, I have enough 
to do here. The war is raging — the pro-slavery spirit here 
feels as if it had been struck, and is girding itself for the 
strife. An anti-abolition meeting is to be held this evening, 
called by ' gentlemen of property and standing.' The hand 
of the South has almost benumbed the spirit of freedom here. 
.... lean not print my paper here; I lectured here one 
evening, to a small audience, in a private manner, no notice 
having been given of it in the papers. This is the exciting 
cause of the meeting this evening. It was but yesterday 
that a wealthy slaveholder, of Kentucky, called to let me 
know that my press in Ohio would be destroyed by a baiul 
of his fellow-citizens, who had determined upon it; that 
almost the whole county would be summoned to the service, 
and that my life was in continual danger. A few days be- 
fore, a citizen of Cincinnati, a high commissioned officer of 
the militia, called to inform me that I would be disgracefully 
punished and abused, and my property destroyed, if I per- 
sisted in my anti-slavery movements I pray you press 

on. It is not a time to be indolent. If we are, our children: 
may wear the livery of the slave. Tf I fall in this cause, I 
trust it will bring hundreds to supply my place/' 



LIFE OF B1RNEY. 47 

At the meeting just alluded to, the Mayor in the chair, 
Mr. Birney obtained liberty to defend himself against the 

attacks which were there made upon biro. But before ho 
had proceeded far, a tumult arose ; and the voice of Wisdom 
was lost in the clamor of fools. Determined, like the devils 
of old, to be let alone, the meeting resolved to trample on 
the rights of every American citizen by suppressing the 
publication of any abolition paper in the city or neighbor- 
hood. The Philanthropist, however, continued from week 
to week to cheer the hearts of its readers, until after some 
three months it was removed to Cincinnati. Here it was 
published without interruption or embarrassment for about 
the same period. — In the mean time, Mr. Birney was more 
or less occupied with lectures on the all-engrossing subject, 
which he delivered in one place and another, as he had 
strength and opportunity. But every where he was resist- 
ed, often with frightful violence, by the " dark spirit of 
slavery." The following paragraph illustrates the opposi- 
tion he met with, and the spirit he cherished on such occa- 
sions. He had been lecturing at Columbus. "During the 
hour I spoke," he said, " the mob, having crowded about 
the door, were engaged in discharging at me their lighted 
missiles. W hen I had finished, and was returning to my 
lodgings a mile distant, I was attended by them a greater 
part of the way, they breaking in on the stillness of the 
night with their fierce and demoniac shouts. But why, you 
may ask, do I dwell on such things, of late by no means of 
uncommon occurrence I I recall them, that our friends, the 
friends of Freedom to the slave, of freedom to the white 
man, of protecting law, of inalienable rights, of constitution- 
al liberty, may be more and more animated to the conflict. 
Every day is disclosing to us more evidently the dangerous 
condition of our country,' and how a God of justice is bring- 
ing on an impenitent nation retribution, in the loss of our 
own liberty, for having plundered and violated the liberty 
of others. Let us then still more industriously gird up our- 
selves to the work before us, of bringing our country to 
penitence, as the best, nay, the only means of saving ber. 
We, who are now in the held may all perish. But what of 
this! Our faithfulness unto death, if we be called thus far 
to suffer, will animate Others to till our places, whilst we go 
home to reap our reward, and be forever with the Lord. 
We right, not with the courage of despair, but with the 
calmnoss of certain victory — with the strength of those who 
feel that their power is from the Almighty." 



48 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

After the Philanthropist had been published in Cincinnati 
about three months, and when the city was " filled with its 
usual summer influx of slaveholders," an onset was made 
upon the Press. In the first place, at midnight and stealth- 
ily, dark figures worked their way into the printing-office, 
and there committed various depredations. They evidently 
expected to intimidate. But the damages were at once re- 
paired ; and all went on as usual. The air was now filled 
with angry voices. More fearful things were threatened, un- 
less the friends of Freedom would abandon their position, and 
submit to the authority of the minions of slavery. Mr. Birney 
was continually exposed to every kind of insult. He had oc- 
casion to stop for awhile at a public house. The boarders 
were at once assembled to devise ways and means to protect 
themselves from his presence ! For this purpose, a little 
less than a score of them, other modes of redress having 
been tried in vain, actually abandoned the table ! A hand- 
bill, moreover, " was posted about the city, offering a reward 
for the delivery of one James G. Birney, a fugitive from 
justice," to "Old Kentucky." About this time, Mr. Birney, 
for himself and his companions in the struggle for Freedom, 
published an address to their fellow-citizens, in which the 
following weighty words impress themselves deeply upon 
the reader : " A band of lawless men array themselves 
against the constitution, declaring that their will, and not 
that of the people, is paramount. What, fellow-citizens, 
ought we to do in such a case % Ought we to yield to fear I 
We have now, in some degree, from the force of cir- 
cumstances, committed to our custody, the rights of every 
freeman in Ohio, of their offspring, of our own. Shall we, 
as cravens, voluntarily offer them up, sacrifices to the spirit 
of misrule and oppression, or as American citizens contend 
for them, till a force which we can not withstand shall wrest 
them from our hands?- The latter part of the alternative 
we have embraced, with a full determination, by the help of 
God, to maintain unimpaired the freedom of speech and the 
liberty of the Press — the Palladium of our rights." 

During the "Reign of Terror" at Cincinnati, Mr. Birney 
had reason to expect that on a given night an attack would 
be made upon his house. His wife was thrown into great 
distress. After soothing her in the best way he could, he 
proceeded, like a man as he was, to put his castle into a 
state of defense. Arms were there, and heroes. But, proba- 
bly aware of the danger to which any such attack would ex- 
pose them, his adversaries forebore, and kept their distance. 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 49 

Matters were fast coming to a crisis. To this result a 
thousand things contributed. The leading impulse, how- 
ever, had its origin in the lust of lucre. No sacrifice was 
too costly for the altar of Mammon. The trade of Cincin- 
nati — the prosperity of the city ; — compared with these, 
what was Freedom — what was Humanity 1 In trampling 
on the most sacred rights to which Human Nature is entitled, 
such as were clothed with the gravest responsibilities were 
not ashamed to prostitute their powers and influence. The 
dignified judge, supported by the solemn priest, and sur- 
rounded by men of wealth and influence, not a few of whom 
were members of different churches ; — these were the heart 
of a conspiracy, to which on every side the ill-bred, the pro- 
fane, the profligate, the reckless attached themselves, to 
work the will of a knot of the most desperate tyrants that 
ever brandished a knife in the face of the republic. No ex- 
pedient was left untried which might reduce the resolution 
of Mr. Birney and his co-adjutors. The Press was plied ; 
large meetings were held ; speeches were made ; resolutions 
adopted ; committees organized — every thing was put in 
motion to reduce or destroy the little band of philanthropists, 
who had pledged their all to the cause in which they were 
enlisted. At length the assault was made. The printing- 
office of the Philanthropist was broken open, the type was 
scattered in the streets, the presses torn down ; — the office, 
in a word, was completely dismantled. The crowd then 
rushed to the houses, one after another, of well-known abo- 
litionists, whose absence saved them from the hand of vio- 
lence. But Mr. Birney was the special object of the Bedlam- 
vengeance which had now broken loose. Hands, as cowardly 
as cruel, were eager to seize upon him, and drag him away 
to the tribunal where Lynch Law, with its gallows-ropes and 
bowie-knives, clamors for the best blood iri the veins of the 
republic. He was, however, as a gracious Providence would 
have it, at a considerable distance from the city, aiding the 
friends of Freedom in their philanthropic exertions. Before 
he returned, the wrath of the multitude had in some measure 
subsided. He at once prepared for the public a " Narrative 
of the Riotous Proceedings against the Liberty of the Press 
in Cincinnati." This done, he was at his post again, assist- 
ing his fellow-laborers in making arrangements for re-issuing 
the Philanthropist. In less than two months, every thing 
was ready ; and the voice of Mercy, through the Press, \\ 'gs 
heard again in behalf of the victims of oppression. At the 

E 



50 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

present time, Cincinnati gives the cause' of Freedom not 
merely a weekly but a daily paper. 

Those who were active in the riot at Cincinnati to crush 
the Freedom of the Press, doubtless professed to be "as much 
opposed to slavery as any body." They would by no means 
be regarded as in league with oppression. They were, ou 
one occasion and another, loud and eager in praise of the 
largest liberty which the laws of the republic allow. And 
yet they rushed ferociously on James G. B.irney, as if nothing 
but his blood could quench their thirst for vengeance. And 
why 1 What evil had he done 1 He had undertaken in the 
use of his vigorous and well-trained powers, and with singu- 
lar wisdom and magnanimity, to do his part towards the de- 
liverance of his country from an evil which, according to the 
admission of all, threatened its destruction. He was him- 
self from the land of whips and fetters, had been himself a 
slaveholder, and was familiar with the chattel principle, in 
all its applications. Decisive proofs he had given of deep- 
toned sincerity, of a thorough acquaintance with the work 
to which he applied himself, and of a resolution which could 
not easily be shaken. He was, moreover, candid, courteous, 
affable : every way a gentleman. His rare fitness for the 
work evinced, that of all men he ought to attempt the deliv- 
erance of his country from the plague of slavery. The 
judges, and priests,, and jurists, and editors, and merchants, 
and artisans, who employed the wild powers of riot to crush 
the Philanthropist, had manifestly sold themselves, no mat- 
ter at what price, to the slaveholding power. They were 
under the control of the chattel principle. That they were 
voluntary slaves — putting their necks of their own accord 
under the yoke, made their servitude all the more degrad- 
ing. — What, then, could Mr. Biraey do, when they required 
him also to sacrifice his manhood on the. altar of slavery? 
He must maintain his position, or sink to a level with his 
assailants — into the very depths of infamy. With this alter- 
native before- him, he made his choice, promptly, wisely, 
manfully. 

The following paragraphs illustrate the spirit which 
amidst lawless tumults and fierce threatening, he was ena- 
bled to maintain : " The enemies of law," said Mr. Biniey, 
" will adopt a new course — they will hereafter operate pri- 
vately — their aim will be against the persons of abolitionists. 
This is now the course. We fear it not. Threats of per- 
sonal violence, to ourself especially — of seizure- and depor- 
tation — are common as !,he air we- breathe ; nor have thev 



LIFE OF JJIRNEY. 51 

been withheld which contemplated a still more disgraceful, 

if not more fatal violence But law has been prostrated 

— violence exults over its downfall ; the Constitution lies in 
dishonorable dust, whilst bloody treason flourishes oyer it. 
Men are struck dumb, and speech is useless for the reformat 
tion of abuses that threaten to load with the fetters of the 
slave themselves and their children. — All this is here — al- 
most upon us, now — and shall it be said, life and, fortune 
and honor should not be hazarded, that the Constitution 
and law and Liberty may be restored to their lost thrones, 
and sway their mild sceptre without a rival 1 No : this 
must be done by those who would rather themselves die 
freemen than live slaves, or our country, glorious as has 
been her hope, is gone forever." 

Again. "Grievous threats have been made for some 
time, chiefly against me personally. I know not whether 
the ferocity of the slaveholders and their confederates here, 
will lead them to attempt the seizure and deportation to the 
South of my person — or whether they will attempt a sudden 
and still more effectual removal of me. If such a thing 
should be permitted, 1 must of course look on it as the way 
in which an infinitely wise God has appointed for me, as 
the part I am to act in the great revolution which he has set 
on foot for the liberation of the oppressed of our land."' 

The paper already alluded to, in which a narrative is giv- 
en of the riotous proceedings against the Liberty of the Press 
in Cincinnati, is a historical document of inestimable value. 
A new edition of it ought to be published, and a copy put 
within the reach of each of our fellow citizens. It can not 
fail to awaken in every upright and generous reader a vari- 
ety of conflicting sentiments ; — indignation, disgust, abhor- 
rence, at the unbridled insolence of the slaveholding oligar- 
chy ; shame, sorrow, and alarm, at the wide-spread and un- 
questioning servility which prevails among us ; admiration, 
love and confidence, at the magnanimity, wisdom and nigh- 
souled heroism of the few like James Gf. Birney, whose 
hearts God had touched, and who were nobly prepared for 
the dreadful crisis on which they were thrown. We need 
make no apology for introducing here a few extracts from 
this invaluable paper. The following array of facts well de- 
serve the earnest eye of every student in American history : 
" During our colonial dependence, the States were all slave- 
holding States. They did not, as colonies, possess the pow- 
er of legislation independently of the control of the mother 
country, exerted either. direcUy. or indirectly. Had they 



52 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

desired, ever so much, to abolish slavery, they could not 
have done so, by their own independent legislative act. 
But, it is believed, that prior to the enlightened discussion, 
and the full establishment of the great principles which led 
to the American Revolution — principles which are embodied 
in the Declaration of Independence — the desire was but 
feeble, in most of the colonies, to see slavery extinguished. 
It is true, that petitions were presented to the competent 
authorities of the mother country to restrain the further im- 
portation into the colonies of slaves from Africa — but 
none, to abolish, or to mitigate slavery, as it already existed 
among the petitioners themselves. The history of the times 
will show, that it was not repugnance to slave// aiding, as a vi- 
olation of the great principles of natural justice or of reveal- 
ed religion, which constituted the true grounds for urging 
the petitions; — but, rather, that a few\ who held in their 
hands the political power of the country, and who had al- 
ready become possessed of a large amount of slave-labor, 
might secure to themselves and their families and connec- 
tions, in perpetuity, a monopoly of such labor. The contin- 
ued importation of slaves from Africa would put it in the 
power of such citizens as owned none, to become purchasers, 
and thus interfere with the present and prospective benefits 
of the monopoly. The criminality in a moral and religious 
point of view, of slaveholding, exerted but a feeble influence, 
a century ago, on the public mind of the civilized world. 
What is so often alledged now, as ' fanaticism' against the 
abolitionists, would have been more remarkable then. The 
Friends were the only sect to whom the criminality of op- 
pression, in the form of slaveholding appeared, even sixty 
or seventy years ago, as it is now beginning to be seen by 
others. By treating it as a violation of religious duty, they 
succeeded in banishing it entirely from their connection. 

" The able moral and political discussion to which the 
disagreements of the colonies with the mother country gave 
rise, for many years previous to the Declaration of Indepen- 
dence, brought into general recognition thoughout this 
country, the doctrines of inalienable rig/its, as they have 
been distinctively termed. Their influence on the most in- 
telligent and patriotic minds, is shown in the fact, that the 
first^Congress, held in 1774, Resolved, That they would nei- 
ther imparl, nor purchase any slave imported after the first day 
of the next December ; after which time thep would discontinue 
the slave-trade, and nedher he, concerned in it themselves, nor 
hire their vessels, nor sell their commodities to such as should 
he concerned in it. 



LIFE OF IJIRNEY. 53 

" In the Congress of 1776, the Declaration of Indepen- 
dence was published — commending itself to the liberal 
minded every where, by asserting, in opposition to the theo- 
ry and practice of all existing governments, that all men 
were created free, and entitled to life, liberty, a/id the pursuit 
of happiness. 

" And aftervverds, when forming the Articles of Confeder- 
ation, 177S, they refused to insert any provision for protec- 
ting the power of masters over their slaves, or authorising a 
master to follow a runaway slave into another State. In 
the debates, it was said, that ' the slaves ought to be dismiss- 
ed, that freemen might fill their places.' 

" As soon as the colonies had thrown off the British yoke, 
their legislative assemblies began their efforts to remove this 
odious institution. In the northern States, general acts of 
emancipation were passed — in the southern, acts authorizing 
individuals to manumit. Massachusetts had asserted in her 
Declaration of Rights, that all men were created free and 
equal. This was constructed by her courts as putting an end 
— and it did, in fact, put an immediate end to slavery within 
her limits. The other New England States with New 
York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, pursued more gradual 
measures for its extinction. 

" So strong and rapid had been the influence of the doc- 
trine of \ inalienable rights,' as set forth in the Declaration 
of Independence, that Pennsylvania and all the States north 
of it — making more than half the whole number — prior to 
17S7, when the present Constitution was formed, had entered 
on measures leading to the entire extermination of slavery 
from among themselves. It was this state of things that (it 
was erroneously supposed) rendered it expedient to adopt the 
provision, that has been construed to authorize the slave- 
holder to recapture his slave who has escaped into a free 
State. Whilst this provision was admitted, shame prevent- 
ed the framers of the Constitution from expressing the odi- 
ous grant of power In direct terms. It is conveyed under 
an ambiguous form of expression, whilst the word slave is 
not to be found in that instrument. Neither is slavery, the 
subject matter of the guaranty, by which it is so often, yet 
so erroneously asserted, that the ' system' of the South is 
secured to her, to be found in the Constitution. No 'guar- 
anty' by the general government could nave been thought 
necessary to the slaveholders — because the validity of the 
tenure by which they held their slaves had never been 
drawn in question, and they themselves looked on it as 



54 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

equally strong, and as unassailable, as the title by which 
they held any other property. Besides the Southern politi- 
cians, who, especially, have regarded the general govern- 
ment as secondary to the State governments, and derivative 
from them, would not, on this account, have asked from the 
former a guaranty which the latter were more competent 
to five. From these considerations, it is believed, that at 
the formation of the present government, no guaranty of 
southern 'slavery,' either constitutional or implied, was once 
seriously thought of — none was demanded — none was offer- 
ed. And it is not at all improbable, had any such guaranty- 
been offered, in the structure of the general government, it 
would have been looked upon by the South as not only in- 
efficacious, but insulting, and calling for the haughtiest 
rejection. 

" Soon after the adoption of the present national Union, 
abolition societies were formed in several of the States 
Their avowed object was the total extinction of slavery in 
the United States. The leaders in those societies were the 
same men whose hands had just laid the foundations of our 
national institutions. Their principles coincided entirely 
with the principles adopted by the abolitionists of the pres- 
ent day. They denounced slavery as an unjust and wicked 
system — one that all good men should endeavor to overturn. 
Their acts agreed with their principles. They wrote tracts 
against slavery — they petitioned Congress to go to the very 
1 verge' of its Constitutional powers for its final extinction. 
On these petitions, Congress in the first session, held under 
the present Constitution, acted, and a series of resolutions 
was adopted, in which the Constitutional powers of Con- 
gress in relation to slavery were accurately defined. The 
doctrines contained in these resolutions are the doctrines of 
the abolitionists of the present day, namely : — That until 
180S, the importation of slaves could not be prohibited by 
Congress. That the States possess individually the sole 
power to emancipate their slaves — That Congress possesses 
the authority to regulate the slave-trade, and the authority 
to prohibit it, even prior to 1S08, in regard to the supply of 
foreign nations ; — and during the discussion of these resolu- 
tions, the right and the duty of Congress to use all means 
for the abolition of slavery, not expressly prohibited by the 
Constitution, was strongly urged by the leading members of 
Congress, (particularly by Messrs. Madison and Gerry,) who 
had taken part in the formation of the Constitution. 

" Now if the institution of slavery was, by mutual com- 



LIFE OF B1RNEY. DD 

■promise, to remain inviolate and immovable, would these 
illustrious men, such as Jay, Franklin, Rush, Madison, and 
Gerry, have conducted in this manner ? Could a compact 
like the one in question have been formed, without John 
Jay being informed of it 1 Had such been the under- 
standing of a compromise between the different States, is it 
possible, that the sagacious Franklin, who assisted in mak- 
ing the compromise, should never have understood it ? Yet 
Jay and Franklin, in their day, were as undoubted abolition* 
ists, and as active in the formation of abolition societies, as 
any that can be found in modern times ; and it was not 
owing to any lack of zeal on their part, that their labors were 
not equally as efficacious as those of abolitionists now, in 
awakening public attention to this momentous subject. John 
Jay, during the war of the Revolution, held this memorable 
language — ' Till America comes into this measure, (the ab- 
olition of slavery) her prayers to heaven for liberty will be 
impious.' When addressing the Legislature of New York, 
then a slave State, he told them, that ' the slaves, though 
held in bondage by the laws of man were free by the laws 
of God.' Franklin and Jay and Rush, in 17S7, united in 
an abolition society, 'to extend the blessings of freedom to 
every part of our race.' The writings published by this 
society and which contain the identical doctrines of ' modern 
abolitionism' are still circulated by the Anti-Slavery Socie- 
ties, and form a prominent part of the publications now pro- 
scribed as ' incendiary.' Through their influence, slavery 
was abolished in many of the present non-slaveholding States. 
The foreign slave-trade was prospectively abolished. Wash- 
ington, previous to his manumission of his own slaves, ex- 
pressed his conviction that slavery ought to be abolished by 
the legislative power — a sentiment, the expression of which 
is now thought a sufficient provocation for dissolving the 
Union. William Pinkney of Maryland, in the House of 
Delegates of that State, forty-seven years ago, predicted the 
very crisis to which we are now arrived. If slavery was to 
be continued, the principles of liberty, he said, would be 
corrupted and undermined. * The resistance of freemen 
against oppression,' said he, 'will become a struggle of pride 
and selfishness, not of principle.' ■ The stream of general 
liberty will have flown so long through the mire of partial 
bondage, that it will have become polluted.' J The habit of 
thinking that the great rights of human nature are not so 
sacred but that they may with impunity be trampled upon, 
will have prepared men for usurpation ; and those who have 



56 LIFE OF BTRNEY. 

been habituated to lord it over others, will become base enough 
to let others lord it over them.'' 

" From these facts, and from all the examination we have 
had it in our power to make, we have no hesitation in pro- 
nouncing- the supposed ' compact,' or ' compromise,' to be a 
groundless fiction, and one, too, of no ordinary malignity. 
It is nothing less than a libel on the illustrious dead, invent- 
ed to deprive the living of their dearest and most invaluable 
rights. It represents the founders of our republican empire, 
but recently engaged in a most severe conflict for the pre- 
servation of those rights which they claimed under the laws 
of God and nature, in common with all mankind, in assum- 
ing their rank among nations, forming a government for a 
free people, according to the principles of freedom, and for 
the preservation of those principles, as solemnly contracting 
that the institution of slavery, every where odious and de- 
testable, should forever remain sacred and inviolable. For 
the honor of these great and good men — for the honor of 
human nature itself — we are happy in believing, that a charge 
involving such gross inconsistency, is utterly groundless. On 
the contrary, if there is any reliance to be placed on past 
history, it is certain, at the commencement of our present 
political system, there was a general belief and expectation, 
that slavery in these United States would be abolished, and 
that speedily." 

' Whose cheek does not burn — who does not feel within 
him a relentless and exterminating hostility to slavery, while 
he reads such words as these : " It is thought necessary to 
recur to circumstances, which, in the order of time, preceded 
our appointment as members of the Executive Committee. 
When the Reign of Terror was introduced into the South, 
last summer, by the sudden and public execution, without 
trial, of five American citizens, charged with being ' pro- 
J'tsxiouaV gamblers — whilst it was kept up by the open plun- 
dering of the national mail — by the pretense of slave insur- 
rections — by the most degrading inflictions — by numberless 
cruel and unauthorized scourging* of such as had either re- 
moved from the free States to the South, or were tempora- 
rily called thither on business — by the offering of Rewards 
for the forcible abduction of peaceable and inoffensive citi- 
zens, with the avowed purpose of handing them over to the 
tender mercies of infuriated slaveholders — by the uncon- 
cealed, the open and illegal hangings of many of our coun- 
trymen in the South, on whom popular suspicion had fast- 
ened the obnoxious sentiment, that they were opposed to 



LIFE OP BIRNEY. 57 

the system of slavery as it existed there ; — whilst, we say, 
this thirst for blood, and for the demolition of every safe- 
guard heretofore established for the protection of individual 
right, was raging among our southern neighbors, the city 
of Cincinnati was not altogether exempt from the disgrace- 
ful infection. Our principal daily newspapers, with, it is 
believed, but a dingle exception, sympathized with the flagel- 
lators, and tormentors, and murderers of the South, and by 
their loud shouts cheered them on to further deeds of cruelty 
and blood. Whilst one of them was bestowing unqualified 
applause on the public scourging of our fellow citizen, 
young Mr. Dresser, although the perpetrators of the outrage 
themselves, acknowledged he had violated no law of the 
State where he suffered — another, as if to render forever 
unnecessary any further proof of plenary consecration to 
the interests of slaveholders, exultingly advised, that the 
Reign of Tenor — more technically known as ' Lynch Law' 
— be set up here in Cincinnati. 

" One of our number, who, before the explosion of south- 
ern violence, had projected the establishment of a journal 
in Kentucky, his native State, to be devoted to a full and 
impartial discussion of the whole subject of slavery as con- 
nected with emancipation, was thwarted in his object by the 
devices of the neighboring slaveholders, and ultimately com- 
pelled, by their persecutions, to remove with his family from 
the State. Looking at the Constitution of Ohio, he there 
saw the fullest, the most honorable, and at the same time, 
the most solemn condemnation that men who love liberty 
could pass upon slavery — and that to every one was secured 
the right — pronounced ; indisputable' — of speaking, writing, 
or printing on ami subject) to the investigation of which he 
might choose to apply the powers of his mind. With this 
view of rights intended to be secured to him, in common 
with every other citizen, by you, the PEOPLE OF OHIO; 
and this, too, by the solemn sanction of the highest, the very 
organic law, which constitutes you a people, it was not to 
be supposed that any one — especially such as were using 
the same rights in their most wanton latitude — would be 
found of a temper so unjust, so treasonable, as to deny him 
also the enjoyment of them. Tn this he was mistaken ; for 
before he had himself come to the conclusion to transfer the 
publication of his paper to this city, the newspapers before 
alluded to, were roused to opposition — were encouraged in 
their outrageous menaces, and animated to their work of 
villification and abuse ; and this, too, as it was said, and as 



5S LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

subsequent events have proved, by persons who are reckon- 
ed as of ■ the most respectable class in society,' — owning 
large real estate in the city — speculators in property, stocks, 
&c. — merchants, who have commercial connections with 
southern slaveholders — and artisans, who are mostly employ- 
ed in manufacturing household furniture, or steamboat, su- 
gar-house, or other heavy machinery, for the South. So 
highly excited had the several descriptions of people just 
mentioned become against the proposed publication, and so 
effect ually had they plied their efforts to alarm the great 
mass of peaceable and law-abiding citizens, who otherwise, 
would have felt but little concern on the subject ; and so 
desirous was the intended editor to remove even the occasion 
of any disgraceful popular explosion, that he determined to 
commence the publication out of the city, and to continue it 
there till a fair, and impartial, and generous character could 
be established for the paper. 

" To establish such a character was considered desirable, 
not only because it is right in itself — but because it would 
tend to allay an objection often made to the discussion of 
the slavery question — that it teas conducted in a .fierce and 
uncharitable spirit. With this object in view — and further, 
that all occasion of exciting the disorderly of whatever 
standing and condition, to any illegal outburst might be taken 
away, the Philanthropist (the paper alluded to) was com- 
menced at the village of New Richmond, twenty miles above 
Cincinnati. But this concession, made at no small sacrifice 
■of convenience and pecuniary means, to the spirit of misrule, 
was followed by but small mitigation of its fury. Although 
the editor, in the temper of conciliation that he felt, and in 
the most respectful language he could use, offered to slave- 
holders the use of his columns for the defense of slavery, 
and gave, in his own manner of treating the subject, satis- 
factory proof of moderation and fairness — still this did not 
shield him from a deliberately concerted attempt, set on 
foot, and prosecuted chiefly by the description of persons 
before mentioned, to 'put down Ins pte&s. On the hrst appear- 
ance of the Philanthropist, the editor, and those who con- 
curred with him in sentiment, were assailed in terms signal- 
ly abusive, through two of the business papers of this place, 
(the Republican and Whig) although they differed widely 
in their views as political partisans. These journals were, 
on that occasion, as they have, been on a more recent and 
more remarkable one, the instruments busily set to work by 
the ' wealthy and respectable,' to excite the ignorant and 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 59 

disorderly to such deeds of mischief as the supposed neces- 
sities of the case might call for." 

Here we have, what is beyond all price, a fair specimen 
of the arguments by which our gentlemen of property and 
standing, in different parts of the country, have been accus- 
tomed to justify themselves in trampling under swinish 
hoofs the authority of God and the rights of mankind. The 
thing is so instructive ; we can not afford to lose a syllable. 
" The note of the day before addressed to James G. Birney, 
was not received until an answer had been almost prepared 
to be sent to that addressed to the Corresponding Secretary. 
It was then concluded, as the time had nearly arrived, for 
the afternoon meeting of the Market House Committee to 
send by Christian Donaldson, a message, that we would hold 
the desired ' conference' with them that evening, at the 
house of Dr. Colby. At the time appointed all the mem- 
bers of the Executive Committee who lived in the city, with 
the exception of Dr. Colby who was called oft" by a profes- 
sional emergency, met, it is believed, twelve out of thirteen 
who composed the Market House Committee. Judge Bur- 
net, the chairman, commenced by giving a long explanation 
of the manner in which he had been brought into the posi- 
tion lie at present occupied. This being disposed of, he 
spoke of the high degree of excitement which pervaded a 
large portion — nineteen-twentieths we believe — of the inhab- 
itants of the city. In proof of it he related a conversation 
he had held with a man apparently of low condition in life, 
who had accosted him in the street — though altogether un- 
known to the judge — in tone and phrase dark and mysteri- 
ous. We will not undertake to give it in the graphic man- 
ner in which it was related by the chairman who seemed still 
to feel the impression, that the mysterious stranger had made 
on him. We will give only the result — which was that the 
stranger on parting with the judge said in reference to the 
destruction of the Philanthropist press, as it was understood, 
make haste — (ice) — or Icon read// to kelp you. Judge Burnet 
professed himself alarmed at the excitement which he be- 
lieved was in the city — and we do not in the least call in 
question the sincerity of the declaration, for his whole man- 
ner and language gave proof of it. He further stated, that 
"by report, the excitement pervaded not only the city, but 
that it had gone some distance into the neighborhood ; that 
there were, between Cincinnati and Columbia (6 miles 
above on the river) 100 men who were banded together, to 
-destroy the Philanthropist establishment— who had their 



60 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

officers appointed — were fully drilled, and ready, at the 
first signal, to make the onset. He also stated that for four 
orfivemilestheexcitementhad passed into Kentucky, and that 
the three towns (Covington, Newport, and Cincinnati) were 
ready, at any moment, to rise for the same purpose. He 
further represented that the mob were becoming impatient 
— were beginning, from what they supposed was the dila- 
tory conduct of the Committee, to lose confidence in that 
body, and to suspect them of rather a favorable leaning to- 
wards the object of their hate. Other gentlemen of the 
Market House Committee were called on to give their 
views as to the state of the public mind. There was no 
material difference among them. One, or more of them 
spoke of the excitement, already nearly irrepressible, that 
prevailed, among the workmen employed in the iron foun- 
dries and boat yards situated generally near the river — of 
one of which, with a large number of hands, he himself was 
the proprietor. Judge Burke said the abolitionists were 
beginning to be regarded as intending to effect their object 
by revolution and in no other way — all other ways being set 
down as utterly impracticable. — Rev. Mr. Spencer rose from 
his seat, when he made his speech — apparently a set one : — 
He commenced by saying, there were those present in 
whose veins flowed the blood of our revolutionary patriots, 
and who were as desirous as any other men, to see no longer 
in our country the track of a slave. He then recited a stan- 
za of poetry condemning slavery, — winding up with taunt- 
ing the abolitionists for not going to the South, and preach- 
ing their doctrines where they might have an opportunity of 
closing the scene with a glorious martyrdom. Much more 
was said, in relation to the excitement than we can take 
room to narrate. 

" The next point mooted was the business, of the city. It 
was on this ground — and on this solely — that the merits of 
the question seemed to be placed. It was asked by us, if 
rents were not high — houses to rent scarce, real property 
on the advance — commercial business brisk for the season 
of the year, and every body — artisan or common laborer — 
who would work, employed at high wages ? All this was 
admitted — and it did appear to our plain judgments to be 
evidence of at least as much prosperity as ought to satisfy 
reasonable men. But it was insisted on the other hand, that 
this state of things (in which all were employed at iiood /cages, ) 
was not the true criterion of prosperity. All this might be 
true — yet if abolitionism in Cincinnati had prevented the 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 61 

South from sending her orders for even more work than 
could be executed by the mechanics now here, it had injured 
the city, — because these very orders would be the means of 
introducing among us more artisans from other places. In 
the solidity of this reasoning the gentlemen on the other side, 
no doubt had entire confidence — but it seemed to us not 
more conclusive, than that of the Kentucky farmer who un- 
dertook to prove to a neighbor that he had lost a hundred, 
calves that spring, by not having, as he migltt have had, a 
hundred cows to produce them. 

" It was asked by us, what evidence there was, that the 
South was withdrawing her business from us because of the 
existence of abolitionism here l To this it was replied, that 
it was to be found in various communications and letters from 
the South. One of the Market House Committee, (Mr. Bu- 
chanan) an extensive and prosperous merchant, who has 
large connections, in the way of business, with the South, 
said the subject had been frequently mentioned to him by 
his southern correspondents, and that they were now begin- 
ning to present the alternative to this city, either to suppress 
the abolition discussion, or to be content to lose their south- 
ern business. He was asked if the Philanthropist or its edi- 
tor had ever been specified, as items in the complaint. Mr: 
B. said they had not — he did not know that either of them 
was particularly known at the South — but the complaint was 
one of general character, that the anti-slavery discussion ivas 
entertained in Cincinnati. 

" On Judge Burnet's remarking, that abolitionists were 
injuring the property-holders of Cincinnati, he was asked to 
specify how he was injured. He stated, in reply, that four 
or five years ago — [this teas between two and three years be- 
fore the commencement of the abolition question in this place] 
it was customary for thirty or forty families from the South, 
attended by their servants who were indispensable to them 
in their excursions, to spend a great part of the summer in 
Cincinnati. That, since the abolitionists had commenced 
their operations, the people of color had become so bold in 
enticing away the servants of the southern visiters that they 
would no longer venture among us ; [Compare this with the 
following from the Cincinnati luquiblican of August 2. * Our 
hotels and boarding houses are always crowded, and hun- 
dreds of southern families who contemplate a sojournment 
of some weeks in the Queen City of the West, have been 
compelled to relinquish their intentions for want of accom- 
modations,'] and that the abolitionists had contributed to 



62 LIFE OF B1RNEY. 

make the people of color much more impudent to the whites 
than formerly. Now, if a man was wise, when he saw four 
or five of them on the pavement, he would diverge into the 
street to pass around them to avoid their insolence in not 
giving the way — and that he had been jostled by them on; 
the side-walks. This was the account, the chairman gave 
of the injury, he was suffering from abolitionists. 

" The chairman having professed satisfactory knowledge 
of the measures and objects of the anti-slavery societies — 
and stated that there was no one who was more a friend of 
emancipation than he was, and after alledging that African 
colonization was the only feasible way of accomplishing the 
extirpation of slavery mongst us, and having uttered sen- 
timents in reference to the principles and results of abo- 
litionism that seemed unusually crude for one of his station 
in society — and being seconded in his opinion "by another 
of the Market House Committee, — it was remarked by 
one of our number, that the entertainment of such sentiments 
by such men convinced him more forcibly than he had yet 
been, of having the whole subject discussed. He then pro- 
posed, that, if the members of the Market House Committee 
would give the influence of their recommendation to a meet- 
ing, to be held in some church of the city for that purpose, 
he [the member alluded to] would give an exposition of anti- 
slavery principles, and be willing to hear any arguments that 
might be offered against them. It was at once replied, that 
such a meeting could not be held in the city, that the people 
would hear no public discussion on slavery, and that the 
speaker would, lose his life in attempting to discuss it. No 
change was produced on the Market House Committee by 
the assurance of the member that with their sanction for the 
call of such a meeting, he was willing to hazard all personal 
peril to himself. 

" The conversation was at length turned to the main ob- 
ject of the meeting — the discontinuance oftfie Phi/anthrojdxt. 
The first suggestions were, that it should be 'postponed,' or 
1 suspended for a time.' All such modified propositions, 
however, were at length, put aside as useless — and the de- 
mand made, of an absolute dis.-miti nuance, with the certain 
alternative in case of refusal, of a mob unusual in its num- 
b -is, determined in its purpose; and desolating in its rava- 
ges. The chairman expressed it as his opinion, that it would 
be one of unprecedented character — that it would consist 
of four or five thousand prisons, bent on the wide destruction 
of property, and that t/co-thirds of the property-holders of the- 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 63: 

city would join it. That it would be utterly vain for any 
man or set of men to attempt to restrain it — it would destroy 
any one who would set himself in opposition to it. 

"■ In order to ascertain what was the temper of the Mar- 
ket House Committee gentlemen, themselves, they were 
asked, whether if a mob could be averted they icould be con- 
tent that the publidatioH of the Philanthropist should he con- 
tinued ? The question was scarcely uttered, when the chair- 
man and several of the other members replied unhesitatingly, 
they would not. One of them qualified what he said, by 
saying he would be content, if he could be satisfied that it 
would produce no injury to the city in any way. It was next 
asked, if they had read the Philanthropist, and if they had, 
whether the objection to its continuance was made on the 
ground of there being anything exceptionable in the manner 
and spirit of conducting it. The answer on the part of one 
of the Committee was, that he had read several of che latter 
numbers — another said that he had read portions of the last 
three or four numbers — another, that he had read a column 
or two, or an article or two, in some one of the first numbers. 
This was the whole amount of knowledge, on the part of the 
Committee, as to the manner in which the Philanthropist 
conducted the slavery discussion. But it was further added 
on their part — that the manner and spirit of the paper had 
nothing to do with the question — it was the discussion of 
slavery here, that was thought to be injuring the business of 
the city. That the paper was believed to be a prominent 
instrument in carrying on this discussion — that therefore, its 
absolute discontinuance was called for-— that the public senti- 
ment would be satisfied with nothing short of this, and that 
it was in such a condition that it could not be reasoned with." 

The reply which Mr. Birney and his friends returned,, 
must not be withheld. " Whilst we feel ourselves constrain- 
ed altogether to decline complying with your request, as 
submitted last evening, to discontinue the Philanthropist, we 
think it but just to ourselves, and respectful to our fellow citi- 
zens generally, to offer a brief exposition of the reasons that 
persuade us to this course. 

" 1. We decline complying — not so much from the fear 
that the particular cause in which our- press is employed may 
be injured — but because compliance involves a tame surren- 
der of the Freedom, c-f the Press — the Right to Discuss.. 

"2. The- Philanthropist is the acknowledged organ of 
some twelve thousand, or more, of our fellow citizens of 
Ohio, who believe that slavery, as it exists in our country, is, 






64 LIFE OF BIRNEY, 

altogether incompatible with the permanency of her institu- 
tions ; who believe that the slavery of the South or the liberty 
of the North must cease to exist ; and who intend to do, what 
in them lies, to bring about a happy and a peaceful termina- 
tion of the former — and this as speedily as facts, and argu- 
ments, and appeals to the consciences and understandings of 
the slaveholders can be made instrumental to effect it. 

" 3. The Philanthropist is the only journal in this city 
or neighborhood, through which these facts, and arguments, 
and appeals can be fully addressed to the community. It 
has been conducted with fairness and moderation, as maybe 
abundantly proved by the acknowledgements of those who 
are opposed to its objects. It has invited the slaveholders 
themselves to the use of its columns for the defense of slave- 
ry, and has given up to a republication of their arguments a 
large share of its space. 

" To discontinue such a paper under existing circumstances, 
would be a tacit submission to the exorbitant demand of the 
South, that slavery shall never more be mentioned among us. 

" 4. We decline complying with your request — because 
if it has originated among our own citizens, it is an officious 
and unasked for intrusion on the business of others — If 
among the citizens of other States, it is an attempt at dicta- 
tion as insolent and high-handed on their part, as a tame sub- 
mission to it would be base and unmanly on ours. 

" 5. We decline complying with your request — because 
we would not preclude ourselves, and others, from discuss- 
ing in the most advantageous manner a subject, which, by 
the acknowledgement of all is of momentous consequence, 
and which is now occupying the minds of the whole nation. 

11 6. We decline complying — because the demand is vir- 
tually the demand of slaveholders, who, having broken down 
all the safeguards of liberty in their own States, in order 
that slavery may be perpetuated, are now, for the fuller at- 
tainment of the same object, making the demand of us to 
follow their example. 

" [The two remaining reasons were omitted — uninten- 
tionally, we have no doubt — in the published report of the 
Market House Committee. They were part of the letter sent 
to the Market House Committee, and are here supplied.] 

" 7. We decline complying — because the attempt is now 
first made in our case, formally and deliberately to put down 
the freedom of speech and of the Press. We are, to be sure, 
the object of the attack — but there is not a freeman in the 
State whose rights are not invaded, in any assault which 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 65 

may be made upon us, for refusing to succumb to an impe- 
rious demand to surrender our rights. 

" 8. We believe that a large portion of the people of 
Cincinnati are utterly opposed to the prostration of the lib- 
erty of the Press — and that there is ?mong us — whatever 
may be said to the contrary — enough of correct and sober 
feeling to uphold the laws, if our public officers faithfully 
discharge their duty. 

" With these reasons— to which many more might be add- 
ed, did time permit — we leave the case with you ; — express- 
ing, however, our firm conviction, should any disturbance of 
the peace occur, that you, gentlemen, must be deeply, if 
not almost entirely, responsible for it, before the bar of sober 
and enlightened public opinion.'' 

The following is a truly striking and impressive view of 
this negotiation : " Thus terminated one of the most singu- 
lar negotiations — whether we regard the subject matter — 
the causes leading to it — or the parties — that has yet been re- 
corded in the annals of our country. 1. The subject matter 
was, the right to investigate and discuss truth — a light be- 
stowed by the Creator on man as his intelligent creature, 
to use as freely as he walks the earth, or breathes the air — 
the exercise of which is required of him as a duty — a right 
which, as an accountable being, he has no power voluntarily 
to relinquish, any more than he has voluntarily to sell his 
liberty, or to part with his life — a right so clear that the 
people of Ohio have, in their Constitution, pronounced it 
" indisputable" — so inestimable, they have adopted it as 
one of the elements of their government, and so liable to 
be invaded hy poicer, that they have attempted to secure iis 
freest exercise by the most stable, the most solemn sanctions. 
2. The reasons for demanding its surrender — slaveholders 
called for it — oppression in the South having prostrated there, 
all legal barriers of individual right and personal safety ; 
having overthrown within her own limits the freedom of 
the Press and of speech — the right to discuss — in order that 
her reign might be perpetuated, demanded it ; a mob of 
three or four hundred — a mere fragment of our population 
— the very feculence of the city, countenanced and encour- 
aged to the deed by leading and iniluential men among us, 
to whom the exercise of the right of discussion was dis- 
pleasing, demanded it. 3. The parties to it — on the one 
hand, ten thousand of our fellow citizens, not, to be sure 
[with but few exceptions] leading and influential, but yet of 
the freemen, the plain and honest yeomanry of Ohio, who 



66 LIFE OF BJRXEY. 

within the limits of the Constitution are contending for its 
very citadel — who are fighting, only with the weapons of 
truth, for that liberty which becomes the more precious the 
more it is endangered by the assaults of its enemies. On 
the other — there are merchants and manufacturers, closely 
united with the slaveholder — lawyers and judges— officers 
of the government, and ministers of the gospel — there are 
wealth and influence, slaveholding servility and aristocratic 
pride — all, marshaling into their service for the work, a band 
fearless of God and regardless of man. Surely, such an at- 
tempt to.trample under foot the liberties of our people— so 
deliberate — so carefully matured, and backed by such an 
amount of moral, intellectual, and pecuniary power, has 
rarely been made in this country !" 

What a beautiful specimen have we here of those rulers, 
who are such '< a terror to evil-doers," and such " a praise to- 
them that do well !" The following, taken down by a 
gentleman who was present, has been furnished as an accu- 
rate report of the Mayor's speech. 

" Gentlemen — It is now late at night, and time we were 
all in bed — by continuing longer, you will disturb the citi- 
zens, or deprive them of their rest, besides robbing your- 
selves of rest. No doubt, it is your intention to punish the 
guilty, and leave the innocent. But if you continue longer, 
you are in danger of punishing the innocent with the guilty, 
which I am convinced no one in Cincinnati would wish to 
do. We have done enough for one night. [' Three cheers 
for the Mayor.'] The abolitionists themselves, must be con- 
vinced themselves by this time, what public sentiment is, 
and that it will not do any longer to disregard, or set it at 
naught. [Three cheers again.] As you can not punish 
the guilty without endangering the innocent, I advise you 
all to go home. [Cries of home ! home ! from the crowd 
drowned the balance of his harangue."] 

The narrative concludes with the following weighty words : 
Surely " the inspiration of the Almighty" is not yet with- 
drawn from mankind. " In the foregoing pages we have en-, 
deavored to present to you an impartial account of an attack, 
the most formidable — ^because of the character of the persons 
concerned, and of the deliberation with which it was planned 
-.-that has yet been made on our common liberties. A few 
words more, and we have done. Notwithstanding the right 
',v <l'sruss belongs to Max, as indisputably as the right to use 
his senses, or the organs of his body in their appropriate 
functions — and the exercise of it is, as it ought ever to be, 



LIFE OF BIRNEY, 67 

free from all foreign control, save that which makes us re- 
sponsible for the use of it in invading other's rights no less 
sacred than our own — yet have we been, again and again, 
held up by the slavery presses of this city as obstinate, couiu- 
macious, for not at once surrendering it on the demand of 
the Market House Committee, This charge has been so 
confidently preferred, and so often reiterated, that, we be- 
lieve, the impression is made on many, that our conduct has 
been actuated by the spirit to which it is ascribed. They 
have been led to judge of our course, rather by the fury of 
the onset to which we have been exposed, than by the calm 
steadfastness with which it has been met. We ask, if any 
property can be more rightfully ours, than that which the 
Market House Committee demanded of us to lay down % 
The rigid to discuss is granted to us by God, and secured to 
us by the highest law of the land. Had the Market House 
Committee seen proper to demand, in the name of their con- 
stituents, the absolute surrender of our houses and our goods 
— backing their demand by the menace, that if they were 
not voluntarily yielded, they would be forcibly taken — would 
their demand been less unreasonable % Have we any higher 
title to these subjects of property, than the gift of God and 
the security of the Constitution 1 Ought we, then, to have 
rendered a servile compliance 1 Or ought we not rather (as 
we did) to have firmly repelled the unjust demand, choosing to 
suffer the consequences, however disastrous to ourselves, in 
order that you, the proper correctors, by legal modes, of ail 
public wrongs, might be made fully acquainted with the dis- 
honor in which the majesty of the law was held, and the dan- 
gers with which our most precious rights were threatened; 
by a lawless and fierce aristocracy 1 

"These same organs of the South charge the undersigned' 
with answering the Market House Committee in terms of 
* insult and defiance? Whilst we fully believe that no Com- 
mittee ever came on an errand more surcharged with wrong, 
and one which furnished on its very face stronger grounds 
of palliation for the treatment complained of, yet are we 
persuaded, on a review of our communications addressed 
to them,, that they contain nothing but, a firm and respectful 
expression of a lawful and patriotic determination. The 
controversy to which we were called was too high — the 
principles for which we contended were of a dignity too 
lofty, to be stained by any resort to insult or abuse. And 
that our plainness of speech should be construed into 'insult 
and defiance' shows that, our editorial upholders of slaverv 



68 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

begin already to demand from us that servility to their aris- 
tocratic instigators which, as republicans yet free, we can 
render to no man or set of men, however influential, and 
which ought no where in this country to be looked for, ex- 
cept it be in the South, and under that ' system,' to the sup- 
port of which they would seem so entirely to have conse- 
crated their labors. 

" Notwithstanding the unusual outburst of lawless aristo- 
cratic violence to which our peaceful, yet decided support 
of the freedom of the Press — ofliherty of speech — of the right 
to discuss — has exposed us, we have lost no confidence in 
the rectitude of our principles, nor in the judgment which 
you, and those which may succeed us, will pass on our con- 
duct. Unconvinced by the force with which our arguments 
have been replied to, we shall still continue fearlessly to 
maintain, and publicly to inculcate, the great principles of 
liberty incorporated in the Constitutions of our State and 
general governments — believing, that if ever there was a 
time, it is now come, when our republic, and with her the 
cause of universal freedom, is in a strait, where every thing 
that ought to be periled by the patriot should be freely haz- 
arded for her relief." 

The strong and elevated character — the genial and pow- 
erful influence of the Philanthropist may easily be inferred 
from the paragraphs from the pen of Mr. Birney, with which 
these pages are enriched. It is enough to say, that his image 
shone upon his editorial articles. And how well the paper 
has been conducted by the present editor, and what service 
it has rendered to the cause of Freedom, its readers are 
ready gratefully to acknowledge. 

From Cincinnati, Mr. Birney removed, in the fall of 1S37, 
to New York. He was most cordially welcomed by his 
brethren there, to whom the anti-slavery public confided 
special responsibilities. He was a member of the Executive 
Committee of the American Anti-Slavery Society, and one 
of its Corresponding Secretaries. Here his wisdom was 
brought into full requisition ; here his powers had free play. 
He occupied a commanding position, and did it honor. 

While in New York, he held a correspondence in which 
thousands took a deep and lively interest — by which thous- 
ands were greatly instructed and refreshed — with the Hon. 
Mr. Elmore, member of Congress from South Carolina. 
The occasion is clearly described in the following words of 
Mr. Birney : " In January, (183S) a tract entitled ' Why 
work for the slave V was issued from this office by the agent 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 69 

for the Cent-a-week- Societies. A copy of it was transmitted 
to the Hon. John C. Calhoun; — to him, because he has 
seemed, from the first, more solicitous than the generality 
of southern politicians, to possess himself of accurate infor- 
mation about the anti-slavery movement. A note written 
by me accompanied the tract, informing Mr. Calhoun why 
it was sent to him. 

Not long afterwards, the following letter was received 
from the Hon. F. H. Elmore, of the House of Representa- 
tives in Congress. From this and another of his letters just 
now received, it seems, that the slaveholding representatives 
in Congress, after conferring together, appointed a commit- 
tee, of iheir own number, to obtain authentic information of 
the intentions and progress of the anti-slavery associations, 
— and that Mr. Elmore was selected, as the South Carolina 
member of the Committee. 

The inquiries of the Committee were reduced to fourteen 
paiticulars, bearing directly upon the designs, methods, 
hopes and resources of the American Anti-Slavery Society. 
To these, one by one, Mr. Birney returned particular and 
full replies. The following paragraph, adapted to the ques- 
tion, " Do your or similar societies exist in the colleges and 
other literary institutions of the non-slaveholding States, 
and to what extent V awakens in the reader painful reflec- 
tions. What an illustration of the extent to which the pub- 
lic mind had become infected with the spirit of slavery ! 
" Strenuous efforts have been made and they are still being 
made, by those who have the direction of most of the literary 
and theological institutions in the free States, to bar out our 
principles and doctrines, and prevent the formation of socie- 
ties among the students. To this course they have been 
prompted by various, and possibly, in their view, good mo- 
tives. One of them, I think it not uncharitable to say, is to 
conciliate the wealthy of the South, that they may send their 
sons to the North, to swell the college catalogues. Neither 
do I think it uncharitable to say, that in this we have a mani- 
festation of that aristocratic pride, which, feeling itself 
honored by having entrusted to its charge the sons of dis- 
tant, opulent, and distinguished planters, fails not to dull 
every thing like sympathy for those whose unpaid toil sup- 
plies the means so lavishly expended in educating southern 
youth at northern colleges. These efforts at suppression or 
restraint, on the part of Faculties and Boards of Trustees, 
have heretofore succeeded to a considerable extent. Anti- 
slavery societies, notwithstanding, have been formed in a 



70 LIFE OP BIR.VEY. 

few of our most distinguished colleges and theological semi- 
naries. Public opinion is beginning to call for a relaxation 
of restraints and impositions ; they are yielding to its de- 
mands ; and now, for the most part, sympathy for the slave 
may be manifested by our generous college youth, in the 
institution of anti-slavery societies, without any downright 
prohibition by their more politic teachers. College socie- 
ties will probably increase more rapidly hereafter ; as, in 
addition to the removal or relaxation of former restraints, 
just referred to, the murder of Mr. Lovejoy, the assaults on 
the freedom of speech and of the Press, the prostration of 
the right of petition in Congress, &c. &c, all believed to 
have been perpetrated to secure slavery from the scrutiny 
that the intelligent world is demanding, have greatly aug- 
mented the number of college abolitionists. They are, for 
the most part, the diligent, the intellectual, the religious of 
the students, United in societies, their influence is gener- 
ally extensively felt in the surrounding region ; dispersed, 
it seems scarcely less effective." 

In illustrating the " means and the power," by which the 
friends of Freedom " proposed to carry their views into ef- 
fect,"' the following words of Mr. Birney can hardly fail to 
impress the reader deeply. " Our ' means' are the Truth — 
the ' Power' under whose guidance we propose to carry our 
views into effect, is, the Almighty. Confiding in these means, 
when directed by the spirit and wisdom of Him, who has so 
made them as to act on the hearts of men, and so constitut- 
ed the hearts of men as to be affected by them, we expect, 
1. To bring the Church of this country to repentance for the 
sin of oppression. Not only the southern portion of it that 
has been the oppressor — but the northern, that has stood by, 
consenting for half a century, to the wrong. 2. To bring 
our countrymen to see, that for a nation to persist in injustice, 
is but to rush on its own ruin; that to do justice is the high- 
est expediency — to love mercy its noblest ornament. In 
other countries, slavery has sometimes yielded to fortuitous 
circumstances, or been extinguished by physical force. We 
strive to win for truth the victory % over error, and on the 
broken fragments of slavery to rear for her a temple, that 
shall reach to the heavens, and toward which all nations 
shall worship. 

" It has been said, that the -slaveholders of the South will 
not yield, nor hearken to the influence of the truth on this 
subject. We believe it not — nor give we entertainment to 
the slander that such an unworthy defense of them implies. 



LIFE OF BIRN'EY. 71 

We believe 'them ?»c»,— that they have understandings that 
arguments will convince— consciences to which the appeals 
of justice and mercy will not be made in vain. If our prin- 
ciples be true — our arguments right — if slaveholders be 
men — and God have not delivered over our guilty country 
to the retributions of the oppressor, not only of the stranger 
but of the native — our success is certain." 

And when the demand is made : " Are your hopes and 
expectations of success increased or lessened by the events 
of the last year, and especially by the action of this Con- 
gress ? And will your exertions be relaxed or increased V 
The following reply is urged. We hardly need ask our 
readers to weigh it well. Where shall we look for words 
more alive with significance] "The events of the last 
year, including the action of the present Congress, are of 
the same character with the events of the eighteen months 
which immediately preceded it. In the question before us, 
they may be regarded as one series. I would say, answer- 
ing your interrogatory generally, that none of them, however 
unpropitious to the cause of the abolitionists they may ap- 
pear to those who look at the subject from an opposite point 
to the one they occupy, seem, thus far, in any degree to 
have lessened their hopes and expectations. — The events 
alluded to have not come altogether unexpected. They 
are regarded as the legitimate manifestations of slavery — 
necessary, perhaps, in the present dull and unapprehensive 
state of the public mind as to human rights, to be brought 
out and spread before the people, before they will sufficiently 
revolt against slavery itself. 

" 1. They are seen in the church, and in the practice of 
its individual members. The Southern portion of the Ameri- 
can church may now be regarded as having admitted the dog- 
ma, that slavery is a divine institution. She has been forced 
by the anti-slavery discussion into this position — either to 
cease from slaveholding, or, formally to adopt the only al- 
ternative, that slaveholding is right. She has chosen the 
alternative — reluctantly, to be sure, but substantially, and 
within the last year almost unequivocally. In defending 
what was dear to her, she has been forced to cast away her 
garments, and thus to reveal a deformity, of which she her- 
self before was scarcely aware, and the existence oi which 
others did not credit. So much for the action of the South- 
ern church as a body. On the part of her members, the 
revelation of a time-serving spirit, that not only yielded to 
the ferocity of the multitude, but fell in with it, may be 
reckoned among the events of the last three years. In- 



72 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

stances of this may be found in the attendance of the 'clergy 
of ail denominations,' at a tumultous meeting of the citizens 
of Charleston, S. C, held in August, 1835, for the purpose 
of reducing to system their unlawful surveillance and con- 
trol of the post-office and mail; and in the alacrity with 
which they obeyed the popular call to dissolve the Sunday 
schools for the instruction of the colored people. Com- 
mittees, (tribunals organized in opposition to the laws of 
the Stares where they exist,) are uniting with the merci- 
less and profligate in passing sentence consigning to infa- 
mous and excruciating, if not extreme punishment, persons, 
by their own acknowledgement, innocent of any unlawful 
act. Out of sixty persons that composed the Vigilance 
Committee which condemned Mr. Dresser to be scourged, 
twenty-seven w T ere members of churches, and one of them, 
a professed teacher of Christianity. A member of the Com- 
mittee stated afterwards, in a newspaper of which he was 
the editor, that Mr. D. had not laid himself liahle to any ]mn- 
ishment hwwyi to the laws. Another instance is to be found 
in the conduct of the Rev. W. S. Plumer, of Virginia. Hav- 
ing been absent from Richmond, when the ministers of the 
gospel assembled together, formally to testify their abhor- 
rence of the abolitionists, he addressed the chairman of the 
Committee of Correspondence a note in which he uses this 
language : — ' If abolitionists will set the country in a blaze, 
it is but fair that they should have the first warming at the 
fire. Let them understand that they will be caught, if they 
come among us, and they will take good heed to keep out 
of our way.' Mr. P. has no doubtful standing in the Pres- 
byterian church with which he is connected. He has been 
regarded as one of its brightest ornaments. To drive the 
slaveholding church and its members from the equivocal, the 
neutral position from which they had so long defended slave- 
ry — to compel them to elevate their practice to an even 
height with their avowed principles, or to degrade their 
principles to the level of their known practice, was a pre- 
liminary, necessary in the view of abolitionists either for 
bringing that part of the church into the common action 
against slavery, or as a ground for treating it as confederate 
with oppressors. So far, then, as the action of the church, 
or of its individual members, is to be reckoned among the 
ovents of the last two or three years, the abolitionists find 
in it nothing to lessen their hopes or expectations. 

" 2. The abolitionists believed from the beginning, that 
the slaves of the South were (as slaves are every where) 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 73 

unhappy, because of their condition. Their adversaries de- 
nied it, asserting that as a class they were ' contented and 
happy.' The abolitionists thought that the arguments against 
slavery could be made good so far as this point was con- 
cerned, by either admitting or denying the assertion. 

" Admitting it, they insisted that nothing could demon- 
strate the turpitude of any system more surely than the 
fact that man — made in the image of God — but a little lower 
than the angels — crowned with glory and honor, and set 
over the works of God's hands — his mind sweeping in an 
instant from planet to planet, from the sun of one system to 
the sun of another, even to the great centre sun of them all 
— contemplating the machinery of the universe ' wheeling 
unshaken' in the awful mysterious grandeur of its move- 
ments • through the void immense' — with a spirit delighting 
in upward aspiration — bounding from earth to heaven — that 
seats itself fast by the throne of God, to drink in the instruc- 
tions of Infinite Wisdom, or flies to execute the commands 
of Infinite Goodness — that such a being could be made 
1 contented and happy' with ' enough to eat, and drink, and 
wear,' and shelter from the weather — with the bare provis- 
ion that satisfies the brutes, is (say the abolitionists) enough 
to render superfluous all other arguments for the instant 
abandonment of a system whose appropriate work is such 
infinite wrong. 

" Denying that ' the slaves are contented and happy,' the 
abolitionists have argued, that, from the structure of his 
moral nature — the laws of his mind — man can not be happy 
in the fact, that he is enslaved. True, he may be happy in 
slavery, but it is not slavery that makes him so — it is virtue 
and faith, elevating him above the afflictions of his lot. The 
slave has a will, leading: him to seek those things which the 
Author of his nature has made conducive to its happiness. 
In these things, the will of the master comes in collision with 
his will. The slave desires to receive the rewards of his 
own labor ; the power of the master wrests them from him. 
The slave desires to possess his wife, to whom God has join- 
ed him, in affection ; to have the superintendence, and enjoy 
the services, of the children whom God has confided to him, 
as a parent to train them by the habits of the filial relation, 
for the yet higher relation that they may sustain to him as 
their heavenly Father. But here he is met by the opposing 
will of the master, pressing his claims with irresistible power. 
The ties that heaven has sanctioned and blessed — of husband 
and wife, of parent and child — are all sundered in a moment 



74 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

by the master, at the prompting of avarice, or luxury, or lust.; 
and there is none that can stay his ruthless hand, or say unto 
him, ' What doest thou V The slave thirsts for the pleasures 
of refined and elevated intellect ; the master denies to him 
the humblest literary acquisition. The slave pants to know 
something of that still higher nature that he feels burning 
within him ; of his present state, his future destiny, of the 
Being who made him, to whose judgment-seat he is going. 
The master's interests cry, ' No ! Such knowledge is too 
wonderful for you ; it is high ; you can not attain unto it.' 
To predicate happiness of a class of beings, placed in cir- 
cumstances where their will is everlastingly defeated by an 
irresistible power, the abolitionists say, is to prove them des- 
titute of the sympathies of our nature — not human. It is to 
-declare with the atheist, that man is independent of the good- 
ness of his Creator for his enjoyments ; that human happi- 
ness calls not for any of the appliances of his bounty ; that 
Go3's throne is a nullity, himself a superfluity. 

" But, independently of any abstract reasoning drawn from 
the nature of moral and intellectual beings, tacts have been 
elicited in the discussion of the point before us, proving 
slavery every where, (especially southern slavery, maintained 
by enlightened Protestants of the nineteenth century,) re- 
plete with torments and horrors; the direst form of oppres- 
sion that upheaves itself before the sun. These facts have 
been so successfully impressed on a large portion of the in- 
telligent mind of the country, that the slaves of the South are 
beginning to be considered as those whom God emphatically 
regards as the 'poor,' the ' ( needy,' the 'afflicted,' the 'op- 
pressed,' the ■ bowed down ;' and for whose consolation he 
said, ' Now will I arise:; I will set him in safety from him 
that puffeth at him.' 

" This state of the public mind has been brought about 
within the last two or three years ; and it is an event which, 
so far from lessening, greatly animates, the hopes and ex- 
pectations of abolitionists. 

" 3. The abolitionists believed from the first, that the 
tendency of slavery is to produce, on the part of the whites, 
looseness of morals, disdain of the wholesome restraints of 
law, and a ferocity of temper, found, only in solitary instan- 
ces, in those countries where slavery is unknown. They 
were not ignorant of the fact that this was disputed ; nor 
that the 'Oimvylky or the South' had become a cant phrase, 
including all that is high-minded and honorable among men'; 
nor, that it had been formerly asserted in our national legis- 



LIFE OF fclRNEY. 75 

lature, that slavery, as it exists in the South, ' produces the 
highest toned, the purest, best organization of society, that 
has ever existed on the face of the earth.' Nor were the 
abolitionists unaware that these pretensions, proving any 
thing else but their own solidity, had been echoed and re- 
echoed so long by the unthinking and the interested at the 
North, that the character of the South had been injuriously 
affected by them, till she began boldly to attribute her pecu- 
liar superiority to her peculiar institution, and thus to strength- 
en it. All this the abolitionists saw and knew. But few 
others saw and understood it as they did. The revelations 
of the last three years are fast dissipating the old notion, and 
bringing multitudes in the North to see the subject as the 
abolitionists see it. When southern chivalry, and the purity of 
southern society are spoken of now, it is at once replied, that a 
large number of the slaves show, by their color, their indisputa- 
ble claim to white paternity ; that, notwithstanding their near 
consanguineous relation to the whites, they are still held and 
treated in all respects as slaves. Nor is it forgotten now, when 
the claims of the South to ' hospitality' are pressed, to object, 
because they are grounded on the unpaid wages of the labor- 
er ; on the robbery of the poor. When 'southern gener- 
osity' is mentioned, the old adage, ' be just before you are 
generous,' furnishes the reply. It is no proof of generosity, 
(say the objectors,) to take the bread of the laborer to lavish 
it in banquetings on the rich. When 'southern chivalry' is 
the theme of its admirers, the hard-handed but intelligent 
working men of the North asks, if the espionage of southern 
hotels, and of ships and steamboats, on their arrival at south- 
ern ports ; if the prowl, by day and by night, for the solitary 
stranger, suspected of sympathizing with the enslaved, that 
he may be delivered over to the mercies of a vigilance com- 
mittee, furnishes the proof of its existence ; if the unlawful 
importation of slaves from Africa, furnished the proof; if 
the abuse, the scourging, the hanging on suspicion, without 
law, of friendless strangers, furnish the proof; if the sum- 
mary execution of slaves and of colored freemen, almost by 
the score, without legal trial, furnish the proof; if the cru- 
elties and tortures to which citizens have been exposed, and 
the burning to death of slaves by slow fires, furnish the proof. 
All these things, says he, furnish any thing but proof of true 
hospitality, or generosity, or gallantry, or purity, or chivalry. 
" Certain it is, that the time when southern slavery derived 
countenance at the North, from its supposed connection with 
'•chivalry,' is rapidly passing away. * Southern chivalry' will 



76 LIFE OF EIRNEY. 

soon be regarded as one of the by-gone fooleries of a less 
virtuous age. It will soon be cast out — giving place to the 
more reasonable idea, that the denial of wages to the laborer, 
the selling of men and women, the whipping of husbands and 
wives in each other's presence, to compel them to unrequited 
toil, the deliberate attempt to extinguish mind, and conse- 
quently to destroy the soul — is among the highest offenses 
against God and man — unspeakably mean, despicable and 
ungentlemanly. 

" The impression made on the minds of the people as to 
this matter, is one of the events of the last two or three years 
that does not contribute to lessen the hopes or expectations 
of abolitionists. 

" 4. The ascendancy that slavery has acquired and exer- 
cises in the administration of the government, and the appre- 
hension now prevailing among the sober and intelligent, 
irrespective of party, that it will soon overmaster the Con- 
stitution itself, may be ranked among the events of the last 
two or three years that affect the course of abolitionists. 
The abolitionists regard the Constitution with unabated af- 
fection, They hold in no common veneration the memory 
of those who made it. They would be the last to brand 
Franklin and King and Morris and Wilton and Sherman 
and Hamilton with the ineffaceable infamy of attempting to 
engraft on the Constitution, and therefore to perpetuate, a 
system of oppression in absolute antagonism to its high and 
professed objects, one of which their own practice condem- 
ned, — and this, too, when they had scarcely wiped away the 
dust and sweat of the Revolution from their brows. Whilst 
abolitionists feel and speak thus for our Constitutional 
fathers, they do not justify the dereliction of principles into 
which they were betrayed, when they imparted to the work 
of their hands any power to contribute to the continuance 
of such a system. They can only palliate it, by supposing 
that they thought slavery was already a waning institution, 
destined soon to pass away. In their time, (17S7,) slaves 
were comparatively of little value — there being then no 
trreat slave labor staple (as cotton is now) to make them pro- 
fitable to the holders. 

11 Had the circumstances of the country remained as they 
then were, slave labor, — always and every where the most 
expensive — would have disappeared before the competition 
of free labor. They had seen too, the principles of liberty 
embodied in most of the State Constitutions; they had seen 
slavery utterly forbidden in that of Vermont — instantaneous- 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 77 

ly abolished in that of Massachusetts — and laws enacted in 
the other New England States and in Pennsylvania, for its 
gradual abolition. Well might they have anticipated, that 
Justice and Humanity, now starting forth with fresh vigor, 
would, in their march sweep away the whole system ; more 
especially, as freedom of speech and the Press — the legiti- 
mate abolished not only of the acknowledged vice of slavery, 
but of every other that time should reveal in our institutions 
or practices — had been fully secured to the people. Again ; 
power was conferred on Congress to put a stop to the Afri- 
can slave trade, without which it was thought at that time, 
to be impossible to maintain slavery, as a system, on this 
continent — so great was the havoc it committed on human 
life. Authority was also granted to Congress to prevent the 
transfer of slaves as articles of commerce, from one State to 
another; and the introduction of slavery into the territories. 
All this was crowned by the power of refusing admission 
into the Union, to any new State, whose form of government 
was repugnant to the principles of liberty set forth in that 
of the United States. The faithful execution, by Congress, 
of these powers, it was reasonably enough supposed, would, 
at least, prevent the growth of slavery, if it did not entirely 
remove it. Congress did, at the set time, execute one of 
them — deemed, then, the most effectual of the whole ; but 
as it has turned out, the least so. 

" The effect of the interdiction of the African slave trade 
was, not to diminish the trade itself, or greatly to mitigate 
its horrors ; it only changed its name from African to Amer- 
ican — transferred the seat of commerce from Africa to 
America — its profits from African princes to American far- 
mers. Indeed, it is almost certain, if the African slave trade 
had been left unrestrained, that slavery would not have cov- 
ered so large a portion of our country as it now does. The 
cheap rate at which slaves might have been imported by 
the planters of the South, would have prevented the rear- 
ing of them for sale, by the farmers of Maryland, Virginia, 
and the other slave-selling States. If these States could be 
restrained from the commerce in slaves, slavery could not be 
supported by them for any length of time, or to any consid- 
erable extent. They could not maintain it, as an economi- 
cal system, under the competition of free labor. It is owing 
to the non-user by Congress, or rather to their unfaithful ap- 
plication of their power to the other points, on which it was 
expected to act for the limitation or extermination of slave- 
ry, that the hopes of our fathers have not been realized ; and 



78 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

that slavery- has, at length, become so- audacious, as openly, 
to challenge the principles of 1776 — to trample on the most 
precious rights secured to the citizen — to menace the integ- 
rity of the Union and the very existence of the government 
itself. 

"Slavery has advanced to its present position by steps 
that were, at first gradual, and, for a long time, almost unno- 
ticed ; afterwards, it made its way by intimidating or corrupt- 
ing those who ought to have been forward to resist its pre- 
tensions. Up to the time of the 'Missouri Compromise,' 
by which the nation was defrauded out of its honor, slavery 
was looked on as an evil that was finally to yield to the ex- 
panding and ripening influences of our Constitutional prin- 
ciples and regulations.. Why it has not yielded^ we may 
easily see, by even a slight glance at some of the incidents- 
in our history. 

"It has already been said, that ws have been brought into 
our present condition by the unfaithfulness of Congress, in. 
not exerting the power vested in it, to stop the domestic 
slave trade, and in the abuse of the power of admitting ' new 
States' into the Union. Kentucky made application in 17.92, 
with a slaveholding Constitution in her hand. With what 
a mere technicality Congress suffered itself to be dragged 
into torpor : — She was .part of one of the ' original States — 
and therefore entitled to all their privileges. 

"One precedent established, it was easy to mak9 another. 
Tennessee' was admitted in 1796, without scruple, on the 
same ground. 

" The next triumph of slavery was in 1803, in the purchase 
of Louisiana, acknowledged afterwards, even by Mr. Jeffer- 
son who made it, to be unauthorized by the Constitution — 
and in the establishment of slavery throughout its vast limits,, 
actually and substantially under the auspices of that instru- 
ment which declares its only object to be — ' to form a more 
perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquil- 
lity, provide for the common defense, promote the general 
welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and. 
our posterity.' 

" In this case, the violation of the Constitution was suffer- 
ed to pass with but little opposition, except from Massachu- 
setts, because we were content to receive in exchange, mul- 
tiplied commercial benefits and enlarged territorial limits. 

"The next stride that slavery made over the Constitution 
was in the admission of the State of Louisiana into the 
Union. She could claim no favor as a part of an f original'. 



LIFE OF B1RNEY. 79 

State.' At this point, it might have been supposed, the 
friends of Freedom and of the Constitution according to its 
original intent would have made a stand. But no : with the 
exception of Massachusetts, they hesitated and were per- 
suaded to acquiesce, because the country were just about 
entering into a war with England, and the crisis was unpro- 
pitious for discussing questions that would create divisions 
between different sections of the Union. ' We must wait till 
the country was at peace/ Thus it was that Louisiana was 
admitted without a controversy. 

« Next followed, in 1817 and 1S20, Mississippi and Ala- 
bama — admitted after the example of Kentucky and Ten- 
nessee, without any contest. 

" Meantime, Florida had given some uneasiness to the 
slaveholders of the neighboring States ; and for their accom- 
modation chiefly, a negotiation was set on foot by the gov- 
ernment to purchase it. 

" Missouri was next in order in 1S21. She could plead 
no privilege, on the score of being partof-oneof the original 
States; the country too, was relieved from the pressure of 
her late conflict with England ; it was prosperous and quiet ; 
everything seemed propitious to a calm and dispassionate, 
consideration of the claim of slaveholders to add props to 
their system, by admitting indefinitely new slave States to 
the Union. Up to this time, the ' evil' of slavery had been 
almost universally acknowledged and deplored by the South, 
and its termination (apparently) sincerely hoped for. By 
this management its friends succeeded in blinding the con- 
fiding people of the North. They thought for the most part, 
that the slaveholders were acting in good faith. It is not 
intended by this remark to make the impression, that the 
South had all along pressed the admission of new slave 
States, simply with a view to the increase of its own relative 
power. By no means : slavery had insinuated itself into 
favor because of its being mixed up with (other) supposed 
benefits — and because its ultimate influence on the govern- 
ment was neither suspected nor dreaded. But on the Mis- 
souri question, there was a fair trial of strength between the 
friends of slavery and the friends of the Constitution. The 
former triumphed ; and by the prime agency of one whose 
raiment, the remainder of his days, ought to be sackcloth 
and ashes, — because of the disgrace he has continued on the 
name of his country, and the consequent injury he has in- 
flicted on the cause of Freedom throughout the world. Al- 
though all the different administrations, from the first organ- 



SO LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

ization of the government, had, in the indirect manner 
already mentioned, favored slavery, — there had not been on 
any previous occasion, a direct struggle between its preten- 
sions and the principles of liberty engrafted on the Consti- 
tution. The friends of the latter were induced to believe, 
whenever they should be arrayed against each other, that 
theirs would be the triumph. Tremendous error ! Mistake 
almost fatal ! The battle was fought. Slavery emerged 
from it unhurt — her hands made gory — her bloody plume 
still floating in the air — exultingly brandishing her dripping 
sword over her prostrate and vanquished enemy. She had 
won all for which she fought. Her victory was complete — 

THE SANCTION OF THE NATION WAS GIVEN TO SLAVERY. 

" Immediately after this achievement, the slaveholding in- 
terest was still more strongly fortified by the acquisition of 
Florida, and the establishment of slavery there, as it had 
already been in the territory of Louisiana. The Missouri 
triumph, however, seems to have extinguished every thing 
like a systematic or spirited opposition, on the part of the 
free States, to the pretensions of the slaveholding South. 

" Arkansas was admitted but the other day, with nothing 
that deserves to be called an effort to prevent it — although 
her Constitution attempts to perpetuate slavery, by forbidding 
the master to emancipate his bondmen without the consent 
of the Legislature, and the Legislature without the consent 
of the master. Emboldened, but not satisfied, with their 
success in every political contest with the people of the free 
States, the slaveholders are beginning now to throw off their 
disguise — to brand their former notions about the ' evil, po- 
litical and moral' of slavery, as 'folly and delusion,' — and as if 
to ' make assurance doubly sure,' and defend themselves for- 
ever, by territorial power, against the progress of free prin- 
ciples and the renovation of the Constitution, they now de- 
mand openly — scorning to conceal that their object is, lo 
advance and establish their political power in the country, — 
that Texas, a foreign State, five or six times as large as all 
New England, with a Constitution dyed as deep in slavery 
as that of Arkansas, shall be added to the Union. 

" The abolitionists feel a deep regard for the integrity of 
the union of the government on the principles of the Consti- 
tution. Therefore it is, that they look with earnest concern 
on the attempt now making by the South, to do, what, in 
the views of multitudes of our citizens, would amount to 
good cause for the separation of the free from the slave 
States. Their concern is not mingled with any feelings of 



LIFE OP BIRNEY. 81 

despair. The alarm they sounded on the 'annexation' ques- 
tion has penetrated the free States ; it will, in all probability, 
be favorably responded to by every one of them ; thus giv- 
ing encouragement to our faith, that the admission of Texas 
will be successfully resisted ; that this additional stain will 
not be impressed on our national escutcheon, nor this addi- 
tional peril brought on the South. 

M This, the present condition of the country, induced by a 
long train of usurpations on the part of the South, and by 
unworthy concessions to it. by the North, may justly be re- 
garded as one of the events of the last few years affecting in 
some degree the measures of the abolitionists. It has cer- 
tainly done so. And whilst it is not to be denied that many 
abolitionists feel painful apprehensions for the result, it has 
only roused them up to make more strenuous efforts for the 
preservation of the country. 

" It may be replied — if the abolitionists are such firm 
friends of the Union, why do they persist in what must end 
in its rupture and dissolution '{ The abolitionists, let it be 
repeated, arc friends of the Union that was intended by the 
Constitution ; but not of a Union from which is eviscerated, 
to be trodden under foot, the right to speak — to print — to 
petition — the rights of Conscience; not of a Union whose 
ligaments are whips, where the interest of the oppressor is 
the great interest — the right to oppress the paramount right. 
It is against this distortion of the glorious Union our fathers 
left us — into one bound with despotic bands — that the aboli- 
tionists are contending. In the political aspect of the ques- 
tion, they have nothing to ask, except what the Constitution 
authorizes; no change to desire, but that the Constitution 
may be restored to its pristine republican purity. 

" But they have well considered the ' dissolution of the 
Union.' There is no just ground for apprehending that such 
a measure will ever be resorted to by the South. It is by 
no means intended by this, to affirm that the South, like a 
spoiled child, for the first time denied some favorite object, 
may not fall into sudden frenzy, and do herself some great 
harm. But knowing, as I do, the intelligence and forecast 
of the leading men of the South — and believing that they 
will, if ever such a crisis should come, be judiciously influ- 
enced by the existing state of the case, and by the consequen- 
ces that would inevitably flow from an act of dissolution — 
they would not, I am sure, deem it desirable or politic. They 
would be brought, in their calmer moments, to coincide with 
one who has facetiously, but not the less truly remarked, 

G 



82 LIFE OF B1RXEY. 

that it would be as indiscreet in the slave South to separate 
from the free North, as for the poor to separate from the par- 
ish that supported them. In support of this opinion, I 
would say : 

" First — A dissolution of the Union by the South would, 
in no manner, secure to her the object she has in view. The 
leaders at the South, both in the church and in the State, 
must, by this time, be too well informed as to the nature of 
the anti-slavery movement, and the character of those enga- 
ged in it, to entertain fears that violence of any kind will be 
resorted to, directly or indirectly. The whole complaint of 
the South is neither more nor less than this — the North 
talks about slavery. Now, of all the means or appliances 
that could be devised, to give greater life and publicity to 
the discussion of slavery, none could be half so effectual as 
the dissolution of the Union because of the discussion. It 
would astonish the civilized world — they would inquire into 
the cause of such a remarkable event in its history : the re- 
sult would be not only enlarged discussion of the whole sub- 
ject, but it would bring such a measure of contempt on the 
guilty movers of the deed, that even with all the advantages 
of ' their education, their polish, their munificence, their high 
honor, their undaunted spirit,' so eloquently set forth by the 
Hon. Mr. Hammond, they would find it hard to withstand 
its influence. It is difficult for men in a good cause, to main- 
tain their steadfastness in opposition to an extensively cor- 
rupt public sentiment ; in a bad one, against public senti- 
ment purified and enlightened, next to impossible, if not 
quite so. 

" Another result would follow the dissolution : Now, the 
abolitionists find it difficult, by reason of the odium which 
the principal slaveholders and their friends have succeeded 
in attaching to their name, to introduce a knowledge of their 
principles and measures into the great mass of southern 
mind. There are multitudes at the South who would coop- 
erate with us, if they could be informed of our aim. Now, 
we can not reach them ; then, it would be otherwise. The- 
united power of the large slaveholders would not be able 
longer to keep them in ignorance. If the Union were dis- 
solved, they would know the cause, and discuss it, and con- 
demn it. 

" A second reason why the South will not dissolve the 
Union, is, that she would be exposed to the visitation of real 
incendiaries, exciting her slaves to revolt. Now, it would 
cover any one with infamy, who would stir them up to vin- 
dicate their rights by the massacre of their masters. Dissolve 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 83 

the Union, and the candidates for ' glory' would find in the 
plains of Carolina and Louisiana as inviting a theatre for 
their enterprise, as their prototypes, the Houstons, the Van 
Rensselaers, and the Sulberlands did, in the prairies of 
Texas, or the forests of Canada. 

A third reason why the South will not dissolve is, that the 
slaves would leave their masters, and take refuge in the free 
States. The South would not be able to establish a cordon 
along her wide frontier sufficiently strong to prevent it. 
Then, the slaves would not be reclaimed, as they now are, 
under the Constitution. Some may say, the free States would 
not permit them to come in and dwell among them. Believe 
it not. The fact of separation on the ground supposed, 
would abolitionize the whole North. Besides this, in an 
economical point of view, the demand for labor in the west- 
ern States would make their presence welcome. At all 
3vents, a passage through the northern States to Canada 
would not be denied them. 

V A fourth reason why the South will not dissolve is, that 

i large number of her most steady and effective population 

rvould emigrate to the free States. In the slave-selling 

States especially, there has always been a class who have 

consented to remain there with their families, only in the 

lope that slavery would, in some way or other, be termina- 

ed. I do not say they are abolitionists, for many of them 

ire slaveholders. It may be, too, that such would expect 

:ompensation for their slaves, should they be emancipated, 

md also that they should be sent out of the country. The 

particular mode of emancipation, however crude it may be, 

hat has occupied their minds, has nothing to do with the 

I >oint before us. They look for emancipation ; in this hope 

hey have remained, and now remain where they are. Take 

way this hope, by making slavery the distinctive bond of 

•nion of a new government, and you drive them to the North. 

These persons are not among the rich, the voluptuous, the 

fFeminate, nor are they the despised, the indigent, the thrift- 

3ss — they are men of moderate property, of intelligence, of 

» onscience — in every way the * bone and sinew ' of the 

! >outh. 

" A fifth reason why the South will not dissolve, is her 
weakness. It is a remarkable fact, that in modern times, and 
l the Christian world, all slaveholding countries have been 
nited with countries that are free. Thus, the West Indian 
nd Mexican and South American slaveholding colonies 
fere united to England, France, Spain, Portugal, and other 



84 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

States of Europe. If England (before her emancipation 
act) and the others had at any time withdrawn the protection 
of their power from their colonies, slavery would have been 
extinguished almost simultaneously with the knowledge of 
the fact. In the West Indies there could have been no 
doubt of this, from the disparity in numbers between the 
whites and the slaves, from the multiplied attempts made 
from time to time by the latter to vindicate their rights by 
insurrection, and from the fact, that all their insurrections 
had to be suppressed by the force of the mother country. 
As soon as Mexico and the South American colonies dis- 
solved their connection with Spain, slavery was abolished in 
every one of them. This may, I know, be attributed to the 
necessity imposed on these States, by the wars in which 
they engaged to establish their independence. However 
this may be — the fact still remains. The free States of this 
Union are to the slave, so far as the maintenance of slavery 
is concerned, substantially, in the relation of the European 
States to their slaveholding colonies. Slavery, in all proba- 
bility, could not be maintained by the South disjoined from 
the North, a single year. So far from there existing any 
reason for making the South an exception, in this particular, 
to other slave countries, there are circumstances in her con- 
dition that seem to make her dependence more complete. 
Two of them are, the superior intelligence of her slaves on 
the subject of human rights, and the geographical connection 
of the slave region in the United States. In the West In- 
dies, in Mexico and South America the great body of slaves 
were far below the slaves of this country in their intellectu- 
al and moral condition — and (in the former) their power 
to act in concert was weakened by the insular fragments into 
which they were divided. 

" Again, the depopulation of the South of large numbers 
of its white inhabitants, from the cause mentioned under the 
fourth head, would, it is apprehended, bring the two classes 
to something like a numerical equality. Now, consider the 
present state of the moral sentiment of the Christianized 
and commercial world in relation to slavery ; add to it the 
impulse that this sentiment acknowledged by the South al- 
ready to be wholly opposed to her, would naturally acquire 
by an act of separation on her part, with a single view to 
the perpetuation of slavery ; bring this sentiment in all its 
accumulation and intensity to act upon a nation where one 
half are enslavers, the other the enslaved — and what must 
be the effect ? From the nature of mind ; from the laws of ( 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 85 

moral influence, (which are as sure in their operation, if not 
so well understood, as the law of physical influence,) the 
party ' whose conscience with injustice is oppressed,' must 
become dispirited, weakened in courage, and in the end 
unnerved and contemptible. On the other hand, the sym- 
pathy that would be felt for the oppressed — the comfort 
they would receive — the encouragement that would be given 
them to assert their rights, would make it an impossibility 
to keep them in slavish peace and submission. 

" This state of things would be greatly aggravated by the 
peculiarly morbid sensitiveness of the South to every thing 
that is supposed to touch her character. Her highest dis- 
i tinction would then become her most troublesome one. 
How, for instance, could her chivalrous sons bear to be 
taunted, whereever they went, on business or for pleasure 
out of their own limits, with the cry, ' The knights of the 
lash !' ' Go home and pay your laborers !' 'Cease from 
the scourging of husbands and wives in each other's pres- 
ence — from attending the shambles, to sell or buy as slaves 
those whom God has made of the same blood as yourselves 
I — your brethren — your sisters ! Cease, high-minded sons 
i of the Ancient Dominion, from estimating your revenue by 
i the number of children you rear, to sell in the flesh market ! ' 
' ' Go home and pay your laborers ! ' ' Go home and pay 
your laborers ! ' This would be a trial to which f southern 
chivalry' could not patiently submit. Their J high honor,' 
their ' undaunted spirit' would impel them to the field — only 
to prove that the 'last resort' requires something more sub- 
stantial than mere ' honor' and ' spirit' to maintain it. Sup- 
t pose there should be a disagreement — as in all likelihood 
there soon would, leading to war between the North and 
. the South 1 The North would scarcely have occasion to 
march a squadron to the field. She would have an army 
that could be raised up by the million, at the fireside of her 
• enemy. It has been said, that during the late war with 
. England, it was proposed to her cabinet, by some enterpris- 
- ing officer, to land five thousand men on the coast of South 
Carolina and proclaim liberty to the slaves. The success of 
5 the scheme was well thought of. But then the example ! 
England herself held nearly a million of slaves at no greater 
distance from the scene of action than the West Indies. 
Now, a restraint of this kind on such a scheme does not 
exist. 

" It seems plain beyond the power of argument to make 
it plainer, that a slaveholding nation — one under the circum- 



86 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

stances in which the South separated from the North would 
be placed — must be at the mercy of every free people ; 
having neither power to vindicate a right nor avenge a wrong. 
11 A sixth reason why the South will not dissolve the 
Union, would be found in the difficulty of bringing about an 
achial separation. Preparatory to such a movement, it 
would seem indispensable, that Union among the seceding 
States themselves should be secured. A General Conven- 
tion would be necessary to adjust its terms. This would, of 
course, be preceded by particular conventions in the several 
States. To this procedure the same objection applies, that 
has been made, for the last two or three years, to holding an 
anti-abolition convention in the South. It would give to the 
question such notoriety, that the object of holding the con- 
vention could not be concealed from the slaves. The more 
sagacious in the South have been opposed to a convention ; 
nor have they been influenced solely by the consideration 
just mentioned — which, in my view, is but of little moment 
— but by the apprehension, that the diversity of sentiment 
which exists among the slave States, themselves, in relation 
to their system, would be disclosed to the country ; and that 
the slaveholding interest would be found deficient in that 
harmony which, from its perfectness heretofore, has made 
the slaveholders so successful in their action on the North. 
" The slaveholding region may be divided into the farm- 
ing and the 'planting — or the slave-selling and slave-bit yi?ig 
districts. Maryland, Virginia, Kentucky, Missouri and East 
Tennessee constitute the first. West Tennessee is some 
what equivocal. All the states south of Tennessee belom 
to the slav e-buying district. The first, with but few excep- 
tions, have from the earliest times, felt slavery a reproach to 
their good name — a drawback on their advancement at some 
period to be cast off. Had this sentiment, been at all en- 
couraged by the action of the General Government, in ac- 
cordance with the views of the convention that formed the 
Constitution, it would in all probability, by this time, have 
brought slavery in Maryland and Virginia to an end. Not- 
withstanding the easy admission of slave States into the 
Union, and ^the yielding of the free States whenever they 
were brought in collision with the South have had a strong 
tendency to persuade the farming slave States to continue 
their system, yet the sentiment in favor of emancipation in 
some form, still exists among them. Proof, encouraging 
proof of this, is found in the present attitude of Kentucky. 
Her Legislature has just passed a law, proposing to the 



LIFE OF BIRXEY. S7 

people, to hold a convention to alter the Constitution. In 
the discussion of the bill, slavery as connected with some 
form of emancipation, seems to have constituted the most 
important element. The public journals too, that are op- 
posed to touching the subject at all, declare that the main 
object for recommending a convention was, to act on slavery 
in some way. 

" Now, it would be in vain for the planting South to ex- 
pect, that Kentucky or any other of the farming slave States 
would unite with her, in making slavery the perpetual hand 
of a new political organization. Jf they feel the inconven- 
iences of slavery in their present condition, they could not be 
expected to enter on another, where these inconveniences 
would be inconceivably multiplied and aggravated, and, by 
the very terms of their new contract, perpetuated. 

"This letter is already so protracted, that I can not stop 
here to develop more at large this part of the subject. To 
one acquainted with the state of public sentiment, in what 
I have called, the farming district, it needs no further de- 
velopment. There is not one of these States embraced in 
it, that would not, when brought to the test, prefer the privi- 
leges of the Union to the privilege of perpetual slaveholding. 
And if there should turn out to be a single desertion in this 
matter, the whole project of secession must come to nought. 

" But laying aside all the obstacles to union among the 
seceding States, how is it possible to take the first step to 
actual separation ! The separation, at the worst, can only 
be political. There will be no chasm — no rent made in the 
earth between the two sections. - The natural and ideal 
boundaries will remain unaltered. Mason and Dixon's line 
will not become a wall of adamant that can neither be under- 
mined nor surmounted. The Ohio river will not be convert- 
ed into flame, or into another Styx, denying a passage to 
every living thing. 

" Besides this stability of natural things, the multiform 
interests of the two sections would, in the main, continue as 
they are. The complicate ties of commerce could not be 
suddenly unloosed. The bread-stuffs, the beef, the pork, 
the turkies, the chickens, the woollen and cotton fabrics, 
the hats, the shoes, the stocks, the 'horn flints and bark nut- 
megs,' the machinery, the sugar-kettles, the cotton-gins, the 
axes, the hoes, the drawing-chains of the North, would be 
as much needed by the South, the day after the separation 
as the day before. The newspapers of the North — its mag- 
azines, its quarterlies, its monthlies, would be more sought 



88 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

after by the readers of the South than they now are ; and 
the Southern journals would become doubly interesting to 
us. There would be the same lust for our northern sum- 
mers and your southern winters, with all their health-giving 
influences ; and last, though not least, the same desire of 
marrying and of being given in marriage that now exists 
between the North and South. Really it is difficult to say 
where this long threatened separation is to begin ; and if the 
place of beginning could be found, it would seem like a 
poor exchange for the South, to give up all these pleasant 
and profitable relations and connections for the privilege of 
enslaving an equal number of their fellow creatures. 

" Thus much for the menace, that the ' Union will ee 
dissolved ' unless the discussion of the slavery question be 
stopped. 

" But you may reply, 'Do you think the South is not in 
earnest in her threat of dissolving the Union V I rejoin, by 
no means ; — yet she pursues a perfectly reasonable course 
(leaving out of view the justice or morality of it) — just such 
a course as I should expect she would pursue, emboldened 
as she must be by her multiplied triumphs over the North 
by the use of the same weapon. - We'll dissolve the Union ! ' 
was the cry, ' unless Missouri be admitted ! ' The North 
were frightened, and Missouri was admitted with slavery 
engraved on her forehead. 'We'll dissolve the Union! un- 
less the Indians be driven out of the South !' The North 
forgot her treaties, parted with humanity, and it is done — 
the defenseless Indians are forced to ' consent ' to be driven 
out, or they are left, undefended, to the mercies of southern 
land-jobbers and gold-hunters. 'We'll dissolve the Union ! 
if the tariff' [established at her own suggestion] 'be not re- 
pealed or modified so that our slave labor may compete with 
free labor.' The Tariff is accordingly modified to suit the 
South. 'We'll dissolve the Union ! unless the freedom of 
speech and the Press be put down in the North ! ' — With 
the promptness of commission-merchants, the alternative is 
adopted. Public assemblies met for deliberation are assail- 
ed and broken up at the North ; her citizens are stoned and 
beaten and dragged through the streets of her cities ; her 
presses are attacked by mobs, instigated and led on by men 
of influence and character: whilst those concerned in con- 
ducting them are compelled to fly from their homes, pursued 
as if they were noxious wild beasts ; or, if they remain to 
defend, they are sacrificed to appease the southern divinity. 
' We'll dissolve the Union ' if slavery be abolished in the 



LIFE OF BIRIVEY. 89 

District of Columbia ! The North, frightened from her 
propriety, declares that slavery ought not to be abolished 
there now. — ' We'll dissolve the Union! ' if you read peti- 
tions from your constituents for its abolition, or for stopping 
the slave trade at the Capital, or between States. Fifty 
northern representatives respond to the cry 'down, then, 
with the right of petition ! ! ' All these assaults have suc- 
ceeded because the North has been frightened by the war- 
cry, ' We'll dissolve the Union ! ' 

"After achieving so much by a process so simple, why 
should not the South persist in it when striving for further 
conquests ] No other course ought to be expected from 
her, till this has failed. And it is not at all improbable, that 
she will persist, till she almost persuades herself that she is 
serious in her menace to dissolve the Union. She may in 
her eagerness, even approach so near the verge of dissolu- 
tion, that the earth may give way under her feet and she be 
dashed in ruins in the gulf below. 

"Nothing will more surely arrest her fury, than the firm 
array of the North, setting up anew the almost forgotton 
principles of our fathers, and saying to the ' dark spirit of 
slavery,' — 'thus far shalt thou go, and no farther,' This is 
the best — the only — means of saving the South from the 
fruits of her own folly — folly that has been so long, and so 
strangely encouraged by the North, that it has grown into 
intolerable arrogance — down right presumption." 

Mr. Birney was for about three years a Corresponding 
Secretary of the American Anti-Slavery Society. In this 
sphere, his opportunities for exerting himself in the cause 
of Freedom were multiplied. He had access to great num- 
bers of his fellow citizens, upon whom he was enabled to 
urge the claims of the enslaved. The influence he exerted 
was as benign as it was powerful. His intelligence, truth- 
fulness and candor — his magnanimity and fidelity — all who 
had the privilege of an acquaintance with him, were not a 
little struck with. They were admitted to be note-worthy 
traits of his character. He was generally listened to with 
respectful attention. If his doctrines were not subscribed to, 
his character was admired. We well remember that an old 
lawyer from New England, after a discussion with him on 
points on which they were at variance, exclaimed, He is the 
most candid man I ever saw ! On those who were often in 
his presence, and enjoyed his confidence, his words and 
deeds made the impression of great wisdom. They looked 
up to him for counsel. Whereever he applied his hand, they 
expected well advised plans and valuable results. 



90 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

About this time it was, that Mr. Birney's father closed his 
earthly career. The father and the son, an only son, seem 
to have regarded each other with a true and tender love. — 
The great enterprize, to which the latter was devoted and 
which could not be endured in Kentucky, had for a long 
time withdrawn them from each other's presence. Just be- 
fore his father's death, Mr. Birney visited him, and was re- 
ceived by him as well as by other friends, with all cordiality. 
He was intent on making such arrangements as would bring 
his son into the bosom of his old age, where he might feel 
the soothing and sustaining influence of his many virtues. 
But all such designs, however warmly cherished, death de- 
feated. In the division of his father's estate, his slaves, 
twenty-one in number, were at Mr. Birney's request, all set 
off to him ; and set off to him, that to their benefit, he might 
apply the principles by which he was controlled. According- 
ly, he at once restored them the freedom of which they had 
been robbed. The deed, through which their emancipation 
was effected — a substantial and ever-enduring monument of 
his philanthropy — a decisive and emphatic proof of his wisdom 
and integrity — can not be read without the most grateful 
emotions, and the most healthful impressions. Here it is : — 

" K.NOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, 

That I, James G. Birney, late of Kentucky, hut now having 
my residence in the city of New York, believing that slave- 
holding is inconsistent with natural justice, with the pre- 
cepts and spirit of the Christian religion, and with the decla- 
ration of American Independence, and wishing to testify in 
favor of them all, do hereby emancipate, and forever set free, 
the following named slaves, which have come into my pos- 
session, as one of the heirs of my father, the late James Bir- 
ney, of Jefferson county, Kentucky, they being all the slaves 
held by said James Birney, deceased, at the time of his 
death." 

Then follow their names and descriptions, and the deed 
concludes: " In testimony of the above I have, hereunto set 
my name and affixed my seal, this third day of September, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and 
thirty-nine. James G. Birney." (Seal.) 

He was in 1840 a member of the "World's Convention," 
which met in London. Here abolitionists were drawn to- 
gether from different parts of Christendom, to interchange 
mutual greetings, relate facts, express their convictions, 
oiler counsel, devise plans, afford mutual encouragement, 



LIFE OP BIRNEY. 91 

and in a thousand ways assist each other in the work of 
Emancipation. In this assembly, Mr. Birney occupied a 
prominent place, and rendered much assistance. After the 
Convention had adjourned, he spent several months in visit- 
ing different parts of England, where on various occasions 
he labored to promote the cause in which his heart was so 
thoroughly enlisted. The estimation in which he was held 
in England may be inferred from the following testimony of 
the Committee of the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery So- 
ciety : " That this committee are deeply sensible of the ser- 
vices renderd to the anti-slavery cause by their esteemed 
friend and coadjutor, James Gillepsie Birney, Esq., whilst in 
this country, in a course of laborious efforts, in which his 
accurate and extensive information, his wise and judicious 
counsels, and his power of calm and convincing statement, 
have become eminently conspicuous." — During his resi- 
dence in England, Mr. Birney prepared and published his 
"American Churches the Bulwarks of American Slavery ;" 
a paper, replete with facts as instructive as they are afflict- 
ive, which has gone through several editions in this country. 
In this work, he declares that it was his "single view to 
make the British Christian public acquainted with the real 
state of the case — in order that it may in the most intelligent 
and effective manner exert the influence it possesses with 
the American churches, to persuade them to purify them- 
selves from a sin that has greatly debased them, and that 
threatens in the end wholly to destroy them." The pamph- 
let consists of facts, well selected and judiciously applied, 
and though of great value, is not easy of analysis. The 
bearing of the subject on human rights and the general 
welfare is altogether vital ; it must not be disposed of with 
a passing notice merely. 

The extent to which the American churches are directly 
involved in slavery, may be inferred from statements like the 
following. A Mississippi divine, of the Presbyterian con- 
nection, Rev. James Smylie, A. M., does not hesitate to 
publish the following declaration: " If slavery be a sin, and 
advertising and apprehending slaves, with a view to restore 
them to their masters is a direct violation of the divine law, 
and if the bwying, getting, or holding a slave, for the sake 
of gain, is a heinous sin and scandal, then, verily, three 

FOURTHS OF ALL THE EPISCOPALIANS, METHODISTS, BAPTISTS, 

and Presbyterians, in eleven States of the Union, are 
of the devil. They ' hold,' if they do not buy and sell slaves, 
and, with few exceptions, they hesitate not to ' apprehend and 



92 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

restore' runaway slaves, when in their power." " In some 
of the older slave States, as Virginia and South Carolina, 
churches, in their corporate character, hold slaves, who are gen- 
erally hired out for the support of the minister. The follow- 
ing is taken from the Charleston Courier, of Feb. 12, 1S35. 

" 'Field Negroes, by Thomas Gadsden. 

" 'On Tuesday, the 17th instant, will be sold, at the north 
of the Exchange, at 10 o'clock, a prime gang often negroes, 
accustomed to the culture of cotton and provisions, belong- 
ing to the Independent Church, in Christ's Church Parish. 
Feb. 6.'" 

Of the condition of slaves, as well the slaves of those who 
do as of those who do not profess to be Christians, the fol- 
lowing paragraph furnishes a painful illustration : " In 1S34, 
the Synod of Kentucky appointed a committee of twelve to 
report on the condition, &c, of the slaves. This passage 
occurs in the report : — 

"Brutal stripes and all the various kinds of personal in- 
dignities, are not the only species of cruelty which slavery 
licenses. The law does not recognize the family relations of 
the slave ; and extends to him no protection in the enjoyments 
of domestic endearment. The members of a slave family 
may be forcibly separated, so that they shall never more 
meet until the final judgment. And cupidity often induces 
the masters to practice what the law allows. Brothers and 
sisters, parents and children, husbands and wives are torn 
asunder, and permitted to see each other no more. These 
acts are daily occurring in the midst of us. The shrieks and 
the agony, often witnessed on such occasions, proclaim with 
a trumpet-tongue, the iniquity and cruelty of our system. 
The cries of these sufferers go up to the ears of the Lord 
of Sabaoth. There is not a village or road that does not 
behold the sad procession of manacled outcasts, whose 
chains and mournful countenances tell that they are exiled 
by force from all that their hearts hold dear. Our church, 
years ago, raised its voice of solemn warning against this 
flagrant, violation of every principle of mercy, justice, and 
humanity. Yet we blush to announce to you and to the 
world, that this warning has been often disregarded, even 
by those who hold to our communion. Cases have occurred 
in our won denomination, u-hcre professors of the religion of 
mercy, have torn the mother from her children, and sent her 
into a merciless and rcturnlcss exile. Yet acts of discipline 
have rarely [never] followed such conduct." 



LIFE OF B1RNEY. 93 

The system, out of which such evils naturally grow — to 
which they necessarily belong, the tallest ecclesiastics among 
us, both North and South, pronounce consistent with the 
genius of Christianity. Bishop Hedding finds its foundation 
in the Golden Rule ! " The right to hold a slave is founded 
on this rule, ' Therefore, all things whatsoever ye would that 
men should do unto you, do ye even so to them ; for this is 
the law and the prophets.' " 

Rev. Prof. Simms, of Randolph Macon College, makes 
" Extracts from Holy Writ," which "-unequivocally as- 
sert the right of property in slaves, together with the 
usual incidents of that right ; such as the power of acquisi- 
tion and disposition in various ways, according to municipal 
regulations. The right to buy and sell, and to transmit to 
children by way of inheritance, is clearly stated. The only 
restriction on the subject, is in reference to the market, in 
which slaves or bondsmen were to be purchased. 

" Upon the whole, then, whether we consult the Jewish 
polity, instituted by God himself; or the uniform opinion 
and practice of mankind in all ages of the world ; or the in- 
junctions of the New Testament and the Moral Law ; we 
are brought to the conclusion, that slavery is not immoral. 

" Having established the point, that the first African slaves 
were legally brought into bondage, the right to detain their 
children in bondage, follows as an indispensable consequence. 

" Thus we see, that the slavery which exists in America, 
was founded in rights 

And those ecclesiastics, who profess to be "as much oppo- 
sed to slavery as any body," contrive cunningly to dodge the 
point, when it is urged on their attention. When with speech- 
less eloquence, the slave entreats them to come to his assist- 
ance, all crushed and bleeding as he is ; — to come to his as- 
sistance against members of their own communion, who are 
remorselessly throttling him, these divines, in a fit of exces- 
sive modesty, exclaim, We have no jurisdiction in such cases. 
We can not say a word in behalf of crushed Humanity, 
though talking is their vocation ! The sword belongs to 
Caesar.- Just as if the friends of Freedom had " petitioned" 
them to wield some such carnal weapon ! Mr. Birney sets 

this matter in a clear light in the following paragraph : 

11 When ecclesiastical councils excuse themselves from acting 
for the removal of slavery from their respective communions 
by saying, they can not legislate for the abolition of slavery ; 
that slavery is a civil or political institution — that it ' belongs 
to Caesar,' and not to the church to put an end to it, they 



94 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

shun the point at issue. To the church member who is a 
debauchee, a drunkard, a seducer, a murderer, they find no 
difficulty in saying, ' we can not indeed proceed against your 
person, or your property — this belongs to Caesar — to the tri- 
bunals of the country — to the legislature ; — but we can sus- 
pend or wholly cut you off from the communion of the church, 
with a view to your repentance and its purification.' If a 
white member should by force or intimidation, day after day, 
deprive another white member of his property, the authorities 
of the churches would expel him from their body, should he 
refuse to make restitution or reparation, although it could not 
be enforced except through the tribunals over which they 
have no control. There is then, nothing to prevent these 
authorities from saying to the slaveholder — ' cease being a 
slaveholder and remain in the church, or continue a slave- 
holder and go out of it; You have your choice.' " 

But the modesty of these ecclesiastics vanishes the instant 
an abolitionist appears. " Tooth and nail" they assail him, 
as if they would rend him in pieces. Take the following 
illustration. " The Rev. William S. Plumer, D. D., of 
Richmond," — a " leader of the Old School party" — " was 
absent from Richmond at the time the clergy in that city 
purged themselves in a body, from the charge of being favor- 
ably disposed to abolition. On his return, he lost no time 
in communicating to the ■ Chairman of the Committee 
of Correspondence,' his agreement with his clerical breth- 
ren. The passages quoted occur in his letter to the chair- 
man. 

" ' I have carefully watched this matter from its earliest 
existence, and every thing I have seen or heard of its char- 
acter, both from its patrons and its enemies, has confirmed 
me, beyond repentance, in the belief, that, let the character 
of abolitionists be what it may in the sight of the Judge of 
all the earth, this is the most meddlesome, impudent, reck- 
less, fierce, and wicked excitement I ever saw. 

" ' If abolitionists will set the country in a blaze, it is but 
fair that they should receive the first warming at the fire. 

" ' Let it be proclaimed throughout the nation, that every 
movement made by the fanatics (so far as it has any effect 
in the South) does but rivet every fetter of the bondsman — 
diminish the probability of any thing being successfully un- 
dertaken for making him cither fit for freedom, or likely to 
obtain it. We have the authority of Montesquieu, Burke, 
and Coleridge, three eminent masters of the science of hu- 
man nature, that of all men slaveholders are the most jealous 



LIFE OF EIRNEY. 05 

of their liberties. One of Pennsylvania's most gifted sons 
has lately pronounced the South, the cradle of Uberty, 

" ■ Lastly — Abolitionists are like infidels, wholly unad- 
dicted to martyrdom for opinion's sake. Let them under- 
stand that the// will be caught [Lynched] if they come among 
us, and they will take good heed to keep out of our way. 
There is not one man among them who has any more idea 
of shedding his blood in this cause, than he has of making 
war on the Grand Turk.' " 

We know not however where to look for so fine a speci- 
men of the spirit we are trying to illustrate, as is preserved 
in the following address. Such a mixture of canting hypoc- 
risy, with brazen impudence and blood-thirsty ferocity ! 
Rev. Robert N. Anderson, of Virginia, thus addresses " the 
Sessions of the Presbyterian Congregations within the 
bounds of the West Hanover Presbytery : — 

" At the approaching stated meeting of our Presbytery, I 
design to offer a preamble and string of resolutions on the 
subject of the use of wine in the Lord's Supper ; and also 
a preamble and string of resolutions on the subject of the 
treasonable and abominably wicked interference of the north- 
ern and eastern fanatics, with our political and civil rights, 
our property and our domestic concerns. You are aware 
that our clergy, whether with or without reason, are more 
suspected by the public than the clergy of other denomina- 
tions. Now, dear Christian brethren, 1 humbly express it as 
my earnest wish, that you quit yourselves like men. If there 
be any stray goat of a minister among you, tainted with the 
blood-hound principles of abolitionism, let him be ferreted 
out, silenced, excommunicated, and left to the public to dis- 
pose of him in other respects. 

" Your affectionate brother in the Lord, 

11 Robert N. Anderson." 
Mr. Birney is far enough from thinking lightly of the insti- 
tutions and arrangements, through which Christianity asserts 
its authority and extends its influence. He regards them 
with a hearty love — they have his countenance and support. 
In the exertions he feels impelled as a philanthropist to make, 
he relies upon Christianity for encouragement and success. 
He has no hope, that his country will forsake the sins, re- 
nounce the follies, and escape the miseries, he so deeply de- 
plores, through any other influence than the power of the 
gospel. Upon this, therefore, his strongest and most cher- 
ished hopes are fastened. But it is the substance and not 
the shadow, on which he so affectionately and confidently 



96 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

relies. The living energy of Truth, embodied and applied 
in Christian institutions — expressed in forms adapted to the 
various relations of life ; — this, this it is, that amidst his 
labors and trials, he reverently invokes, — upon this, this alone 
he gratefully depends. When, therefore he sees, as with his 
open eye he can not but see, a lifeless Sham usurping the 
name and the place of a live-giving Reality, his indignation 
is aroused, he is filled with painful apprehensions. He reso- 
lutely strips the baptized fiction of its disguises, that his 
countrymen may see how ugly and how impotent it is, and 
betake themselves at once and earnestly to the power, from 
which alone they are entitled to expect redemption. Hence 
the pages from which we have been making a few extracts. 

On his return recently from England, President Kellogg, 
of Illinois, briefly described the impression, which was left 
there by Mr. Birney's visit. Mr. Kellogg's words afford a 
gratification, to which our readers are entitled. 

" It was truly refreshing to me while I was in Great Brit- 
ain, amid the many complaints against my countrymen to 
which I was obliged to listen, to hear our excellent friend, 
James G. Birney so frequently spoken of, and always in 
terms of unqualified approbation and respect. The mention 
of his name in those circles in which he was known, and they 
were both numerous and extensive, invariably imparted plea- 
sure, and many were the inquiries which were made in respect 
to his welfare. I could not but observe that intelligent men 
both in England and Scotland very highly appreciated him 
for that trait in his character, which I have always from my 
first acquaintance with Mr. Birney, regarded as exhibited by 
him in a remarkable degree. You will doubtless understand 
me as referring to his candor. He never deals in exaggera-t 
tion or sophistry. In his public addresses and discussions, 
which were numerous, in that country, as well as in his private 
conversations, by the sobriety of his own views, by the fair- 
ness and fullness with which he stated the positions and argu- 
ments of his opponents, and by the manliness with which he 
met and refuted them, he ever impressed his auditors with a 
conviction of the soundness of his sentiments and of the per- 
fect reliance which might be placed upon his statements. 
The visits of such men to foreign lands, are an honor to our 
country, and leave behind them a savor which is grateful to 
an American citizen." 

Within the sphere of politics, the abolitionists had belong- 
ed to no one party, exclusively. In their views and meas- 
ures and cherished preferences, they differed widely from 



LIFE OP BIRNEY. 97 

each other on many points in political economy and the sci- 
ence of government. But the regard, which they cherished, 
one and all, for the fundamental principles, to which our 
government is professedly adjusted, bound them together in 
one brotherhood. The principles, which united them, they 
regarded as every way superior in significance and power, 
to the opinions which divided them. In promoting the sub- 
lime objects, to which as the friends of Freedom they were 
all devoted, they felt, that they had the strongest claims on 
each other's sympathy and assistance ; — claims, which must 
be yielded to, whatever might become of the comparatively 
petty things, which characterized the political parties, with 
which they had respectively acted. They resolved, there- 
fore, to give their suffrages only to such candidates for of- 
fice, as would pledge themselves to subserve at any position, 
to which they might be elevated, the welfare of the oppress- 
ed — as would exert themselves to remove from the necks of 
our unhappy countrymen the yoke of slavery. And where 
this pledge was given by one candidate and withheld by 
others, all seeking the same office, he was looked upon as 
entitled to the support of the abolitionists around him, 
though belonging to a party to which they had been oppos- 
ed. Hence arose the habit, maintained for some time by 
the abolitionists, of questioning the various candidates for 
office. 

In occupying such ground, it is obvious, the abolitionists 
became a distinct party in politics. Without overlooking 
other subjects, to this also they were now intent on making 
an application of the principles, which lie at the basis of the 
anti-slavery enterprise. They no longer belonged to the 
parties, with which they had been connected. They had 
principles — they had a policy of their own — strongly char- 
acteristic — clearly distinguishing. They really, though 
somewhat indirectly, set up the candidates, whom, as a par- 
ty they might be expected to support. These were to be 
selected from other parties ; but selected with a marked 
and avowed reference to the* principles, aims and measures, 
which characterized the abolitionists. They were then, and 
were admitted to be, a distinct political party. 

Experiment and reflection, however, forced upon the ab- 
olitionists the painful conclusion, that they had adopted a 
mistaken and ill-advised policy. There was no want of an- 
swers to their questions. The music of fair promises was 
continually in their ears. This candidate and that ; — O yes, 
if he were once elected to the office, for which his ambition 

H 



98 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

gaped, he would be sure to do all he could for the slaves- 
The word could, however, it was presently found, must be 
interpreted in the light of his party obligations ! The char- 
acteristic policy of his party, must at whatever hazard or 
expense be adhered to ; if consistently with that, any thing 
could be done for the cause of Freedom, he was willing to 
attempt it. And it clearly entered deeply into the jtolicy of 
every -party, from which candidates for office Were to he selected, 
to propitiate the favor — to secure the support, of slaveholders. 
Thus the conditions, on which the abolitionists offered their 
suffrages were not — could not be complied with. The mo- 
ment any one in office acted on their principles, he aban- 
doned the party, by which he was elevated and to which he 
had sworn fidelity. Could he officially exert himself for the 
abolition of slavery, without offending every slaveholder in his 
party, and bringing down upon himself and upon his fellows 
a storm of wrath ] What could come of urging questions 
on men, thus crippled and embarrassed 1 What were their 
pledges good for] What could be expected of one — of 
any one, who was identified with a party, which as a party 
was confessedly under the control of the dark spirit of slave- 
ry I Instructed by experience, and enlightened by reflec- 
tion, the abolitionists could not have held on to the policy of 
questioning candidates without betraying gross stupidity or 
deep hypocrisy. 

The embarrassments, in which the abolitionists were thus 
involved, were the occasion of frequent and earnest discus- 
sions. The question to be answered was; shall we so 
change our policy, as to choose our candidates for office, 
not from slavery-ridden parties, but from among ourselves. 
On these shall our votes instead of being scattered abroad 
be concentrated I Shall we insist upon it, that those, who- 
are to have our suffrages, shall fairly represent us — shall be 
controlled by our principles, hold our aims, employ our 
measures % Great numbers of professed abolitionists were 
too closely wedded to their parties to abandon them, thus 
decisively and openly, in honoi of any principle, however- 
sacred ;— --of any object, whatever might be its magnitude. 
Others were crippled with various apprehensions. They 
feared, that the abolitionists were too few and feeble, to enter 
with any prospect of success on a design, so comprehensive- 
in its import, and demanding such unwearied activity, such 
large resources, and powers so vigorous and varied. They 
feared, that such a change in its characteristic policy would- 
introduce dissention into the ranks of Freedom, and thus- 



LIFE OF BIRNET. &9 

reduce, and depress, and discourage. They feared, that 
ambition might kindle its fires in many a bosom, which had 
hitherto been free from its influence. Others again had lost 
their confidence in the institution of civil government, how- 
ever it might be organized and maintained. They were dis- 
posed therefore rather to throw off the political responsibili- 
ties, they had hitherto sustained, than to add any thing to* 
their weight and extent. Into this discussion the late Myron 
Holley entered with great earnestness. He brought his 
manly and well trained powers to bear upon it with marked 
effect. He was a wise and strong man ; ready to obey the 
God's voice, which required him to let the light of his prin- 
ciples shine through his conduct, as clearly in politics as in 
any other sphere of responsibility. His was a logical mind, 
and his an eloquent tongue ; he was able, therefore, to con- 
vince and persuade. He was thoroughly enlisted in the 
cause of Humanity, and therefore indefatigable in wielding 
his powers in so high a service. In a local convention in 
western New York, where his influence was deeply felt, 
James G. Birney was nominated as Freedom's candidate 
for President of the United States. In the spring of 1840, a 
general convention was held by the abolitionists in Albany, 
where the policy of independent nominations was fully de- 
termined on. Here, such men as Myron Holley, Elizur 
"Wright, Jr., and Joshua Leavitt, were active and efficient in 
conducting their fellows to the conclusion, that a Liberty 
Party was the dictate of Wisdom — was imperiously de- 
manded by the voice of Freedom. Here, James G. Birney 
was nominated to fill the highest station in the Republic. 

How Mr. Birney would be likely to regard such a move- 
ment, might have been inferred from such paragraphs as the 
following, which flowed from his pen a few months before. 
" Our political movement, heretofore, may be compared to 
the wake of a vessel at sea — never increasing in length, no 
matter how many thousands of miles she may sail. But the 
present movement shows that we have discovered our mis- 
take — that there is enough of life and spirit among us to at- 
tempt its correction — that we are willing to act as well as 
talk — to overshadow, with this ^reat question, minor ones 
that have for a long time distracted portions of our friends 
and alienated them from each other — and that instead of 
resting satisfied with still longer committing our sacred 
cause to the hands of its enemies, or of mere partiznns who, 
almost uniformly thus far, have either bullied, or befooled, 
or betrayed us, we have confidence enough in it and in our- 



100 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

selves to take the political^ as we have the other parts of it, 
into our own keeping and under our own management. I 
look on the independent party movement as proof, not only 
of the greater force and energy of the anti-slavery cause, 
but of its greater expansion ; and I am not more surprised 
at it, than I would be, at seeing the young of a noble bird, 
grown too large for the nest, and feeling its strength and 
courage equal to the attempt, committing itself to the bosom 
of the air, and training its powers in the region of thunders 
and lightnings and storms." 

In the month of May, just before he set sail for England, 
Mr. Birney signified his acceptance of the nomination, in a 
letter replete with wisdom, well worthy of the candidate 
for the office, for which he had been named. See how he 
disposes of the plea, so often urged and so widely effective, 
of" other interests" to justify the choice of unjust rulers — so 
unjust as impudently and remorselessly to sacrifice the dear- 
est rights, and trample on the highest prerogatives of our 
common Humanity. " The ' other interests' here meant 
are such as relate to the pecuniary, commercial, agricultu- 
ral and manufacturing condition of the country. It is not 
denied, that these are important interests, well meriting the 
protection of the government. But they are not the highest 
concerns of a government. The security of life — of liberty 
— of civil and religious privileges — of the rights of con- 
science — of the right to use our own faculties for the promo- 
tion of our own happiness — of free locomotion, — all these, 
together with the defense of the barriers and outposts 
thrown around them by the laws, constitute the highest con- 
cerns of a government. These, for the last six years, we 
have seen invaded one after another — the administration 
aiding in the onset — till the feeling of security for any of 
them has well nigh expired. A censorship of the mail is 
usurped by the deputy postmasters throughout more than 
half the country, and approved by the administration under 
which it takes place. The pillage of the Post-Office is per- 
petrated in one of our principal cities, and its contents made 
a bonfire of in the public square ; — no one is brought in 
question for the outrage. Free speech and debate on the 
most important subject that now agitates the country, is ren- 
dered impossible in our national legislature ; the right of 
the people to petition Congress for a redress of grievances 
is formally abolished by their own servants ! And shall we 
sit down and dispute about the currency, about the sub- 
treasury or no sub-treasury, a bank or no bank, while such 



LIFE OF B1RNEY. 101 

outrages on constitutional and essential rights are enacting 
before our eyes 1 Shall we imitate the two wiseacres who 
disputed about the hire of the house till they were driven 
out of doors by the flames which were consuming it 1 

" The truth is, the government of the country is in the 
hands of the slave power. This has been the case ever 
since the triumph of that power on the ' Missouri question.' 
Since that fatal event, its dominion has been asserted with 
greater boldness, and it has been yielded to by the free 
States with the requisite submission. The North, in rela- 
tion to the South, is as a conquered province — conquered by 
a power whose intrinsic strength in every respect is com- 
paratively contemptible, but whose weakness is made 
strength by union. With united councils and concentrated 
vigor it has acted, and continues to act on the confiding and 
divided North. It has claimed every thing — the North has 
yielded every thing. Yet does the slave power fear the su- 
perior energies of the North ; for well does it know, that rf 
the North by any sudden and imperious act of domination 
should be aroused to rebel, the reign of the conquerors must 
be short. But they practice, and successfully too, the politi- 
cal tactics of the tyrant Lysander ; where the lion's skin is 
too short, they eke it out with the fox's tail. Does the 
North become restive, and show signs of insisting on occa- 
sionally supplying the country with the first officer of the 
government. The slave power does not flatly refuse to 
grant what is thus half demanded. She only imposes the 
condition, that the- candidate or candidates be such as she 
can approve — such as have given indubitable proof of their 
attachment to Southern institutions — such as are shameless 
enough, with the Declaration of Independence before their 
eyes, and a coffle of hand -cuffed slaves in view, to bow down 
to the dark spirit of slavery and swear eternal fidelity on its 
altars. Will she contend with the North at the hazard of 
losing her sway over it, for the empty honor of supplying a 
President from her own territory, as long as she can choose 
her men at the North ] No : she has too much wisdom to 
engage in a game so foolish and unprofitable." 

In alluding to the sacrifice of " inherent and constitutional 
rights" by "the most pernicious administration, with which 
the Republic had been cursed," Mr. Birney traces "the intol- 
erable evil" to the pressure of a state necessity, which had 
chained the nation to the car of slavery. " It is not denied 
that Mr. Van Buren, in keeping faith with the slave power, 
ha3 disregarded and trampled under foot the inherent and 



102 LITE OF BIRXEY. 

constitutional rights of the people. Nor is it intended by 
any thing- that has been said to plead for his re-election. 
Far from it. His administration has been decidedly the 
most pernicious with which the Republic has been cursed* 
But the fact that it has been so, only proves the greater as- 
cendancy of the slave power, in the control of the govern- 
ment. A power whose chief interest (the slave system) is 
in direct antagonism to free institutions every where — 
whose Agriculture is desolation — whose Commerce is main- 
ly confined to a crazy wagon and half fed team of oxen or 
mules as the means of carrying it on — whose manufacturing 
' Machinery,' is limited to the bones and sinews of reluct- 
ant slaves — whose currency is individual notes always to he 
paid, (it may be at some broken bank',) and mortgages on 
men and women and children who may run away or die, 
and on land, which without them is of little value : such a 
power is certainly not the most competent to manage the 
affairs of a government based on the everlasting truth, that 
all men are created free and entitled to their liberty, and to 
whose prosperity no bounds could be assigned if the ele- 
ments of it were but left free anil unfettered." 

The folly of persisting in the effort to unite Freedom and 
slavery into a living, self-consistent unit, he thus pointedly 
exposes. " The conclusion of the whole matter is, that, as 
a people, we are trying an experiment as unphilosophical 
in theory, as it has been, and ever will be, found impossible 
in practice •: to make a harmonious whole out of parts that 
are, in principle and essence, discordant. It is in vain to 
think of a sincere union between the North and the South, 
if the first remain true to her republican principles and hab- 
its, and the latter persist in her slaveholding despotism. 
They are incapable, from their natures, of being made one- 
They can no more be welded together into one body of uni- 
form strength and consistency, than clay and brass. They 
may, it is true, be pressed together and made to cohere by 
extraneous appliances ; and the line of contact may be 
daubed over and varnished and concealed : but the first 
shock will make them fall asunder and disclose the fact, that 
there never was any real incorporation of the substance. A 
huge oligarchy, as the South is, made up of a multitude of 
petty despotisms, acting on the principle that men are not 
created equal — that a favored few are born, ready booted 
and spurred, to leap into the saddles with which the backs 
of the man;/ are furnished by nature — such a government, I 
say, when brought by circumstances into close juxtaposition 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. l'.'O 

■and incessant intercourse with republics acting on principles 
-diametrically opposite, must soon be brought to modify, and 
•eventually to relinquish its principles and practices — or, vice 
versa, the republics must undergo a similar change, and as- 
similate themselves to the practices of the despotisms. One 
or the other must, in the end, gain the entire ascendancy." 

Again. " The same system of legislation never can be 
successfully applied to two communities, or parts of a nation, 
differing as widely in principle and practice, as the North 
and the South. Legislation intends to act beneficially on 
the labor of a country. Where that labor is partly free and 
partly slave, the same legislation can not be made beneficial 
to both. The protective Tariff is an instance of this. The 
proposition for the Tariff came first from the South. The 
efficiency of slave labor — the only labor to which southern 
politicians were accustomed — was doubtless one of the data, 
by which its benefits were estimated. But when the impulse 
of the Tariff legislation was given — as it necessarily was — 
to the whole of the labor of the country, what was the conse- 
quence I Just this — that the free labor so far outstripped 
the slave labor, as utterly to dishearten those who had looked 
to the latter, and make them believe that the system which 
seemed so replete with benefits, before it was tried, was ab- 
solutely injurious to them : whereas it was but relatively so. 
The South then cried out for its repeal or modification. 
This was accorded to them of course. Such must be the 
-issue of all legislation which gives a new impulse to the 
mass of labor, in a country where that labor is partly free 
and partly slave. Ill success in the competition produces 
discontent, and clamors arise on the part of the monopolists 
of slave labor for a repeal of the laws — although they may 
have accomplished all that was expected of them, so far as 
-the free labor of the country was concerned." 

The secret of the derangement in our "monetary affairs" 
is thus laid bare. " Mr. Van Buren is greatly blamed for 
the low and deranged condition of the monetary affairs of 
the country, for the last three years. But this is to place the 
blame on one of the consequences and not on the cause. The 
blame has not been fixed at the right point ; it ought to be, 
placed to his consenting, as a citizen of a republic, to be- 
come the instrument of the slave power. For what can a 
free, republican and commercial State look for, but confusion 
and ruin, when they entrust their affairs to a people without 
commerce, without manufactures, without arts, without in- 
dustry ; whose whole system of management is one of ex* 



104 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

pense, waste, credit, and procrastination ? Look at the 
Florida war for proof. Nearly $4. 0,000,000 has already- 
been expended in this enterprise, the object of which, (to 
break up a refuge for runaway slaves,) is as useless to us as a 
nation, as the manner in which it has been conducted is dis- 
graceful to our honor. How far the power, which impels 
the administration, respects commerce, may be seen in the 
case of Hayti. That Island the largest of the West India 
group except one, teeming with the most valuable products, 
and wanting what we can furnish, has heretofore yielded us 
a valuable trade, and is still ready to do so, provided our 
commercial intercourse can be conducted on terms of mutual 
benefit and dignity. Hayti now contains a rapidly increas- 
ing population of about 1,200,000, and is capable of easily 
sustaining four or five times that number. — All the commer- 
cial advantages which we might now enjoy, and the increase 
of which hereafter we might secure by the most ordinary 
civility, are about to be sacrificed to the slave power. The 
Haytians achieved their Independence as our forefathers did 
ours — by rebellion. They have, at sacrifices and self-denial 
almost incredible, maintained it; but they are black, and to 
treat a nation of blacks as free, would lead the slave of the 
South into some knowledge of his dignity as a man. There- 
fore it is that this valuable channel of commerce is about to 
be closed." 

In the ensuing election, it is not to be denied, that great 
numbers, who had been reckoned abolitionists, were borne 
away by the popular frenzy to the support of names, pledged 
to the support of slavery, and, of course, most unworthy of 
the suffrages of freemen. Why describe the expedients, 
which were employed to secure the election of General 
Harrison 1 What else could the recital awaken in any 
o-enerous bosom than shame, sorrow, indignation ? But 
amidst the wide-spread defections, by which the ranks of 
professed abolitionists were thinned, some seven thousand 
voters refused to " bow the knee to Baal." 

In the spring of 1811, the nomination of Mr. Birney was 
renewed. — During his residence at New York and before 
his visit to England, Mr. Birney was called to close the eyes 
of his wife. We have seen from the pen of one of her sons 
— a son, worthy of the name, he bears — a touching testimo- 
ny to the excellence and beauty of her character. She was 
the mother of eleven children, six of whom remain to cher- 
ish as a sacred thing her memory. Her health was feeble 
for many years ; but trusting in God, as she did, she carried; 



LIFE OF BIRNEf. 105 

about with her a brave heart, which sustained her amidst 
her multiplied trials. For could the wife of James G. Bir- 
ney, beset as he often was with perils, be a stranger to trib- 
ulation % " Her husband," so her son gratefully testifies, 
« ever found in her a helper in every noble work. And in 
all the experience of domestic life, he always addressed her 
in the language of respect mingled with affection." To this 
he adds ; " among her last words to me when I parted with 
her for the last time was an admonition to stand by my fath- 
er in the cause of the slave."— In the spring of 1841, Mr. 
Birney became connected with his present wife — a lady of 
great worth— a cherished member of the family of Fitzhugh. 
After visiting his native State, he took up his residence at 
Saginaw, his present home, in the State of Michigan. 

Mr. Birney was nominated anew by the Convention, 
greatly distinguished for its numbers and dignity, held in 
the summer of 1843 at Buffalo. In reply to the official no- 
tice of this, which he received in a letter from Judge King, 
of Ohio, he had occasion to examine the claims of John Q. 
Adams to the confidence of the abolitionists. He disposes 
of these claims with his accustomed candor, courage and 
power. The course of Mr. Adams in relation to the " anti- 
slavery agitation in Congress," he thus characterizes. 
" His course, in my judgment, has been eccentric, whim- 
sical, inconsistent ; defended in part by weak and inconclu- 
sive, not to say frivolous arguments ; and taken as a whole 
thus fer, is unworthy of a statesman of large views and a 
right temper in a great national conjuncture." He then 
proceeds by an induction of particular facts to illustrate and 
confirm this general judgment. He shows clearly enough, 
that while Mr. Adams on various occasions had professed a 
deep and lively sympathy with the abolitionists, he had op- 
posed their designs at every point where they were distin- 
guished from other classes of their fellow-citizens. On 
grave occasions they had in violation of their own establish- 
ed rules put confidence in his words in the face and eyes of 
deeds, which flatly contradicted them ! Those for whose 
especial benefit they were intended will not be likely soon 
to forget the lessons, which the following paragraphs were 
designed to inculcate. 

"This departure from the rule in Mr. Adams' case, has 
been followed by the consequences that usually attend, either 
directly or indirectly, departures from rules that have been 
deliberately adjusted for the management of large affairs. 
The abolitionists, in electing Mr. Adams, made him thti; 



,106 ItfFE OF IHRNEY. 

■own witness — hoping like an eager but an inexperienced 
litigant ; that his testimony would be favorable to them, be- 
cause he was heard to speak freely of the general bad char- 
acter of their adversary. But the upshot -of the matter is, 
•that every thing that is substantial in his testimony is favora- 
ble to their adversary. 

" To them he gives * words — words — words ! ' The effect 
•has been as it always is in such cases. 

" Do the abolitionists assault slavery in Florida — in the 
District of Columbia 1 — there is Mr. Adams, the main reli- 
ance of their adversary, placed in his position of power by 
abolitionists — playing ' fast and loose,' at pleasure, between 
-the contending parties — amusing the one with speeches and 
letters against slavery, all very interesting and eloquent to 
be sure, but serving the other day and night, defending the 
* Citadel' of their abominations. 

" Do the abolitionists labor so to correct public sentiment 
that Congress possessing unlimited discretionary power in 
the premises, shall be persuaded to refuse Florida admission 
into the Union as a slave State % Mr. Adams is unceasingly 
impressing on the public mind, that this would be a breach 
of the national faith. 

" Do they toil to produce the general conviction that 
-slavery -can not long withstand the influence of a fast rising 
-public sentiment against it 1 Mr. Adams, in his cold re- 
sponse to the warm greetings of the colored population of 
Cincinnati, assures us that ' as long as Africa encourages 
slavery, it is impossible to put an end -to it in America.' 
And, as if to extinguish in the colored people all hope of an 
event in which they more than any other class of our popu- 
lation, are especially interested, adds : 

" ' How this can be done I do not pretend to say. It is 
not the nature nor the right of our government to interfere 
•with the right of any foreign country, not even the govern- 
ment of Africa.' 

" The abolitionists insist on immediate emancipation as 
-the most practicable and safest mode of emancipation for all 
parties. Mr. Adams despatches it as ' a moral and physical 
•impossibility-' 

" They affirm at a convention, the largest and most delib- 
erately called together of any they have yet held, that the 
law of God is the Supreme law; that whenever human 
laws, no matter with whatever solemnities enacted, come in 
conflict with it, or aim to set it aside, they carry with them 
•no obligatory force ; are void. Mr. Adams, on the heel of 



life or "bihney. 107 

that convention, and on the most public occasion he could 
make, affirms that ■ the force of moral principle is and must 
be transgressed by the conventional rules of human society' 
— thus superseding the laws of the Creator by the enact- 
ments or usages of his creatures. 

" For the logic by which Mr. Adams, after asseverating 
in almost every variety of form our language can supply, 
that no laws can confer or sanction property hi human beings 
has arrived at the conclusion, that this barbarian, brutal 
usurpation ought to be endured at the heart of the govern- 
ment until the wrong-doers voluntarily relinquish their hold 
on their victims ; that Florida ought to be admitted into the 
Union, with a slaveholding constitution — as if an immunity 
to annihilate the inalienable rights of the weaker portion of 
society were an essential element in our republican forms of 
State government; that immediate emancipation in this coun- 
try is a moral and physical impossibility — in view of the in- 
stances of its. success on this continent, with which Mr. Ad- 
ams must be familiar — that slavery must first be abolished 
among the Mahomedan and Pagan chiefs of Africa, before 
it can be possible to put an end to it in Christian America — 
for such logic, I say I can entertain but little respect. 

" And believing as L do, that ' there is no wisdom, nor un- 
derstanding, nor counsel against the Lord,' that no people can 
be permanently prosperous or happy who in "heart or prac- 
tice deny His right to reign on earth among men ; and that 
all attempts to persuade them that they are but types of po- 
litico-infidel empiricism — believing this, I can entertain no 
higher respect for the ethics of Mr. Adams than I have ex- 
pressed for his logic; but do wholly repudiate any and every 
code founded on the pernicious error that the command- 
ments of God may innocently or advantageously be 'trans- 
gressed by the conventional rules of human society.' 

"Mr. Adams owes much of his present popularity — may I 
not say, nearly all — to his connection with the anti-slavery 
agitation. Abolitionists have contributed more than any oth- 
er class of persons, to swell the tide of his influence. That 
influence is now active in fortifying against them every prac- 
ticable point at which they have attacked slavery in this coun- 
try ; and his quasi sympathy with them gives to it an inde- 
pendent and unusual force. There is no one who is doing 
so much — I assume not to say, it is so intended — to deaden 
the awakening sensibilities of our countrymen against the 
private iniquity and public disgrace of slavery, as Mr. Ad- 
ams — so much to reconcile them to forbearance with a sys- 



108 LIFE OF BIRNT1Y. 

tern which that gentleman oftener and more vehemently than 
any other statesman among us, has branded as against justice 
— humanity — nature — the laws of God ; and as 'deadly dis- 
ease,' before which the Union will fall, if it fall not before the 
Union." 

Last winter, "a large meeting was held in Pittsburgh, to 
consider the subject of the annexation of Texas. A com- 
mittee was appointed to correspond with all those citizens, 
whose names are before the public as candidates for the 
Presidency, and ask of them an explicit declaration of their 
views on the subject of annexation." The reply of Mr. Bir- 
ney is eminently characteristic. It is directly and wholly to 
the purpose. The convictions of the writer are described 
definitely and clearly ; — without ambiguity or disguise. — 
The argument is as beautiful as it is compact and conclusive. 
The whole paper is a just and striking specimen of genuine 
statesmanship ; — such as is alone adapted to the exigencies, 
on which our country is thrown. — The bearing of the ques- 
tion on the Constitution is thus happily disposed of. Surely 
if Mr. Birney is a "man of one idea," it sheds a clear and 
certain light on a great variety of objects, in the sphere of 
our relations. 

" In complying, as I cheerfully do, with the request — to 
your first interrogatory, ' Would the proposed annexation be 
constitutional V I answer in the negative. 

"Our government is strictly one of delegated authority. 
The 'powers' imparted to it are carefully described and 
embodied in the Constitution. None of them authorizes the 
government, in any way, to accept of a cession of foreign 
territory. So far from it, they bear no relation, nor do they 
contain the slightest allusion to such an event. 

"I do not forget that Louisiana and Florida, once foreign 
territory, were annexed to the L T nion ; but the President 
who projected and consummated the purchase of the former, 
both knew and acknowledged whilst he was negotiating it, 
that it was unauthorized by the Constitution. 

"Nor am I unaware that some among us, of high authority 
in such matters, maintain that, as the Constitution confers on 
the government the power of making treaties, it consequently 
confers the power to acquire territory by treaty. This is a 
two edged sword : for if the power to make treaties carry 
with it the incidental power to acquire without stint, terri- 
tory of other nations, equally does it carry with it the power 
to cede without stint, the territory we already possess, to oth- 
er nations. If we adopt the construction, that the treaty 



LIFE OP BIRNEY. 109 

making department is not to be limited by the ' powers' im- 
parted by the people to the government — then may whole 
States be transferred to other sovereignties — then is the in- 
tegrity of the Union — nay, our political existence itself, in 
the hands of a President and two-thirds of a quorum of the 
Senate. 

" I am not averse to a liberal construction of the powers 
of the government, whenever the objects sought are plainly 
allowed in the Constitution. But when they are unknown 
to the Constitution, the liberal construction which becomes 
necessary to authorize them, is but another name for usur- 
pation. 

" It ought never to be lost sight of, that in this country the 
sovereignty, in substance, as well as in name, abides with 
the people ; that the powers of the government are but em- 
anations or portions of that sovereignty imparted to such of 
the citizens as may be duly called to administrative func- 
tions ; and that these powers, whilst they are to be exercised 
solely for the general welfare, must not be exercised at ran- 
dom, but within the limits marked out by the people them- 
selves in the Constitution. Should experience prove that 
these limits are too narrow, the people on being duly resorted 
to, will, through their own instrumentality, the States, en- 
large them as they may deem it expedient. Mean time, the 
inconveniences arising from powers thought to be too much 
restricted, but which are susceptible of so complete a rem- 
edy, ought to be patiently borne with ; for they are as noth- 
ing, when compared- with the uncertainties, the disorders, 
the perils, the oppressions attending a government all at 
loose ends, vacillating and distracted by the varying opinions 
and conflicting theories of those who may successively be 
called to administer it. Governments without number have 
been brought to nought by what is called a liberal construc- 
tion of their powers ; but few have suffered loss by a rigid 
one. The liberal construction of to-day is not unfrequently 
made the ground- work of a more liberal, if not a licentious 
one to-morrow." 

Aside, however, from the Constitution, Mr. Birney has 
grave objections to the annexation. They imply, as he de- 
scribes them, far-reaching and comprehensive views as well 
as true magnanimity and warm benevolence. " To your 
second question — ' Supposing it constitutional, would you 
be favorable to annexation on any terms V I reply, I would 
not. 

" The permanent success of a government must have 



110 LIFE OF 31RNEY. 

some relation to the extent of its territorial limits. Whilst 
they may, doubtless, be too narrow for the highest develop- 
ment of national prosperity, so may they be too large. 
Without saying that our territory is too large, I say, it is 
large enough for all the just and useful purposes of govern- 
ment. 

" I know no good reason, why we should desire to have 
Texas united to us. The United States and Texas are not 
connected by large rivers watering both ; nor are they sep- 
arated from other nations by deserts, or by chains of moun- 
tains forming, joint barriers of protection, and indicating 
that we ought to be one nation. If we desire annexation 
because she is conterminous with us, Texas once obtained, 
we shall, for the same reason burn for the annexation of 
Mexico ; nor shall we be able wholly to quench our thirst 
but in the oceans which wash on all sides the continent we 
inhabit. 

" So far am I from thinking the annexation of Texas 
would be beneficial, to us, I wish she were re-united to 
Mexico, and that as one people, they were rapidly advan- 
cing to the highest grade of intellectual and political power. 
To have such a power on our borders— one whose charac- 
ter, and whoso rights we could not help respecting — would 
most favorably affect us, as I think, in a variety of ways. 
One only I shall allude to ; it would restrain that wild, buc- 
canier spirit of adventure, unhappily existing to a great ex- 
tent in our country ; a spirit that is at war with all solid 
improvement and true civilization, and which, unless juster 
notions can be made to prevail, will soon begin to set at de- 
fiance the restraints of our own government, and render the 
condition of weak communities on our borders one of con- 
stant insecurity and alarm. 

"Asa private citizen,. I would do all' that I honorably 
could, to defeat the scheme of annexation. So would I in 
any other public station than the one to which your note 
refers. The President is a department of the government, 
and stands in an altogether peculiar relation to the country. 
' Powers-' are entrusted to him, not so much with a view to 
his dictating or even leading in any particular line of policy 
which wholly regards the ordinary pecuniary interests of 
the community, as to his being the conservator of the Con- 
stitution and of the- honor of the government. Should he 
hesitate to use these powers to prevent a violation of the 
Constitution, or to resist the legislative bodies acting under 
the impulse of an intlamed constituency, misled and demand - 



LIFE OF BJRNEY. Ill 

ing of the government what it would be manifestly unjust 
and dishonorable in the government to grant— as, for in- 
stance, the repudiation of a national debt, or ,1 fraudulent 
evasion of the obligations of a treaty — he would prove him- 
self unworthy of the high trust reposed in him. Such a- 
President as Washington — caring much for his country, 
little for himself would in such cases, breast the torrent 
with all his constitutional might, trusting that, in due time, 
wisdom would be justified of her children. But, in matters 
purely of expediency or policy, the executive ought not to be 
expected to cherish the feeling, or manifest the pertinacity 
that is generally considered allowable, if not commendable, 
in individuals differently situated. His duty then is, to fall 
in with the wishes of the people, matured and embodied in 
the deliberations of their representatives, although their 
views may, in important respects, differ from his."' 

To the bearing of the question on slavery, Mr. Birney 
applies a powerful and practiced hand. The reader, who 
presuming that he already knows all about the matter, may 
be disposed to dismiss the following .paragraphs with a hasty 
glance, we advise to pause a little. He may find himself 
greatly instructed and refreshed on ground, with which he 
had thought himself familiar. "My answer to your third 
and last inquiry — ' Would you he willing to receive it as a> 
slave territory V — may be anticipated generally, from what 
I have said in answer to your second inquiry. But I trust 
you will receive indulgently a brief explication of my views- 
on this subject : 

" I allow not to human laws, be they primary or second- 
ary, no matter by what numbers, or with what solemnities 
ordained, the least semblance of right to establish slavery, 
to make property of my fellow, created, equally with my- 
self, in the image of God. Individually, or as political com- 
munities, men have no more right to enact slavery, than 
they have to enact murder or blasphemy, or- incest or adul- 
tery. To establish slavery is to dethrone right, to trample 
on justice, the only true foundation of government. Gov- 
ernments exist not for the destruction of liberty, but for its 
defense ; not for the annihilation of men's rights, but their 
preservation. Do they incorporate in their organic law the 
element of injustice ? — do they live by admitting it in prac- 
tice 1 Then do they destroy their own foundation, and ab- 
solve all men from the duty of allegiance. Is any man so. 
besotted as, for a moment, to suppose that the slaveholder 
Ijas an atom of ridit to his slave ; or that the slave has walk 



112 LIFE OF BIRXEY. 

ing on him an atom of obligation to obey the laws that en- 
slave him, that rob him of every thing — of himself? — No 
one : else why do all just men of all countries rejoice, when 
they hear that the oppressed of any country have achieved 
their liberty, at whatever cost to their tyrants ? 

" On this ground, were there no other, I should say, we 
can not receive Texas as a slave territory. We have no 
right to continue chains which we have no right to forge or 
to impose. 

" But there are other grounds : — the Constitution of the 
United States does not permit the organization or the con- 
tinuance of slavery on domain brought within its exclusive 
jurisdiction. None of the specified powers authorize the 
establishment of slavery ; nor is its establishment necessary 
or proper for carrying into execution any of these powers. 
" Again : Two of the objects of the government set forth 
in the preamble of the Constitution are, to establish justice, 
and to secure the blessings of liberty, in the land. With jus- 
tice and liberty, slavery is wholly incompatible. All men 
so regard it. What then, shall we do ? Shall we so inter- 
pret the silence of the Constitution on this matter as to 
make it outweigh the establishment of justice, and the per- 
petuation of the blessings of liberty, those high aims of the 
Union, expressed in the directest terms ? Surely not. 

" But, admitting that, on constitutional grounds, no valid 
objection can be made against the acquisition of foreign 
territory ; who does not know, that every institution, law, 
usage or custom existing in the acquired territory, inconsist- 
ent with the fundamental principles of the government 
making the acquisition, ceases at the moment of annexation, 
as a matter of course. This is so plainly the instruction of 
common sense as to call for nothing but the mere statement 
of it. Thus, when the District of Columbia was ceded to 
the United States, the slavery then existing within it, being 
irreconcilable with fundamental objects of the government, 
the establishment of justice and the perpetuation of liberty, be- 
came extinct the moment the transfer was made. There 
was not — there is not — there can not be, a slave within the 
District of Columbia, without totally disregarding not only 
the spirit but the letter of the Constitution. The legislative 
indirection by which slavery was continued in the District 
after the transfer, was a device wholly unworthy the repre- 
sentatives of a people who had just adopted such a Consti- 
tution as ours. Could the question of the constitutionality of 
slavery in the District be submitted to a competent tribunal 



LIFE OF BltlNEY, 113 

-^•one not made up of actual slaveholders artd others under 
the bias of slavery — there could not be a moment's doubt as 
to the character of the decision. Before such a tribunal, the 
slavery side of the question would be too bald for argument. 

u So, too, in regard to the slavery that existed in Louisiana 
«nd Florida, at the time of their transfer to the United 
States. But it was determined on by our rulers that it 
should be sustained. — With that view, as the most feasible 
^device, provision was made in the treaties of purchase for 
securing to the then resident slaveholders of these territories 
their right (?) of continuing to hold their slave property. 
By what authority ] No power had been imparted by the 
people, (admitting, for argument's sake, that they could im- 
part such a power,) to the government itself, or to any de- 
partment or office of it, to establish or continue slavery 
within her exclusive jurisdictional domain. To infer from 
the silence of the Constitution in regard to slavery as a na- 
tional-government-concern, with full knowledge, too, that 
deliberation on this subject engaged the attention of the con- 
vention; — to infer, I say, from this silence, that the people 
intended to clothe the President and two thirds of a quorum 
of the Senate with authority to introduce slavery into the 
government, and this, too, knowing, as we do, that justice 
and liberty had been placed as sentinels in its vestibule, 
would not only be absurd, but eminently disrespectful to 
the very source of all constitutional authority. Had Mr. 
Jefferson and Mr. Monroe accepted treaties providing for se- 
curing their peculiar privileges and immunities to an order 
of nobility or a religious establishment that might have ex- 
isted in Louisiana and Florida when they were respectively 
ceded, they would not, in so doing, have shown a more wil- 
ful disregard of the Constitution, and of the people, by 
whose authority it was made, than they did in spreading the 
mildew of this accursed system over the largest and fairest 
portion of our national domain. 

"To this twofold violation of the Constitution, in the act 
of acquiring territory and in the provision made for the per- 
manency of slavery, a third, of kindred complexion with the 
last, may be added. Instead of confining the operation of 
the treaties to the cases of the resident slaveholders of Lou- 
isiana and Florida, the only ones provided for, the slavehold- 
ers of the States were allowed, without restraint, to intro- 
duce their slaves into those territories. From the first, this 
was permitted under our slaveholding executives, and it has 
been persisted in so long without being interrupted or even 



114 LIFE OF BIRNEY. 

questioned, that Louisiana and Florida slavery, as parts c 
the whole system, are now considered to he as firmly estab 
lished, ay, and as lawfully too, as is the slavery of Georgia 
or of South Carolina, under their respective black codes. 

" The unauthorized purchase of Louisiana must be regard- 
ed as, in its consequences, the most disastrous event for 
our country to be found in its political history. In saying 
this, 1 neither forget nor underrate the advantages of the ac- 
quisition, in a merely territorial point of view. But might 
not those advantages have been as certainly secured, without 
bringing on ourselves" the odium and the ills which we are 
now suffering, from having extended and strengthened the 
empire of slavery 1 Would not the people, on being pro- 
perly appealed to, have so amended the Constitution as to 
have authorized the acquisition, whilst they carefully guarded 
against the continuance and diffusion of slavery in that vast 
region, out of which three slave States have already been, 
carved 1 

" Next to the purchase of Louisiana, in calamitous con- 
sequences to the country, was the admission of Missouri 
into the Union, as a slave State. Into this struggle the slave 
power entered with a fierceness that did not seem to charac- 
terize it in former times. But it did not forget — -it never 
does — to eke out the lion's skin with the fox's tail. That 
st-uggle, in which, too, treachery in the North did its part 
but too well; issued in the Complete triumph of the enemies 
of the Constitution. Its friends, vanquished, betrayed, re- 
tired discouraged from the field. From that time till the 
present, the government has been swayed by men who show, 
in the enslavement of their fellow-men, how heartily they 
despise the truths of the Declaration of Independence ; by 
men whose lives are but the expression of the coarse, bar- 
barian contempt with which every claim of humanity, and 
every principle of just and* equitable government may be 
spurned and trampled on in the face of God and man. — 
Their power, too, has been exercised in the same insolent 
spirit of overst ership that marks brutal rule at home over 
tlhe ragged starvelings of their rapacity and avarice. The 
free States Bend tiheir members of Congress to Washington 
to be overawed*} corrupted and despised. The venal orators 
and declaimers ol Alliens, who sold themselves and their 
country to Philip, were not looked on with supremer con- 
tempt by their supercilious purchaser, than are the betray- 
ers of the North by their slaveholding overseers, when driv- 
ing them to their dailv task of olHcial meanness and servility.. 



LIFE OF BIRNEY. 1 Jg 

"Such is the condition of our affairs new — one for which 
we have been prepared, mainly by the two annexations that 
have already taken place, and by the admission of Missouri 
into the Union. It is a sad condition — but not devoid of 
hope. For again are the friends of the Constitution and of 
universal liberty rallying, and fast swelling the ranks of a 
party in whose success lies, as I firmly believe, the only rea- 
sonable ground of hope for the rescue of the Republic from 
its most dangerous and most insidious foe. Already is it 
evident, that the constancy, and energy, and activity of the 
Liberty Party are not without some of their proper fruits. 
The sagacious begin to discover that the slave power has met 
with an adversary more formidable than any it has yet had 
to cope with — that confusion and despondency are showing 
themselves among the leaders of its battalia ; — that the res- 
cue of the government from that dark power, and the crown- 
ing blessing of our holy struggle, its utter and everlasting 
overtJiro'C, shall, at no very distant period, cause the song of 
praise and thanksgiving to ascend from all the borders of 
the land to Him in whose might we have fought, and who 
has given us the victory. At such a time, in such a crisis 
to receive Texas as a slave territory would be a grievous 
event to be added to the already unhappy catalogue of events 
of kindred character, that have been used to establish injust- 
tice in the land, and to perpetuate the evils of the most 
abominable tyranny that man has ever usurped over his fel- 
low man.*' 

We have said, that the selection of James G. Birney, by 
the Liberty Party as their candidate for the presidency, was 
marked by great wisdom. The more carefully his character 
is studied the more evident will that appear. 

The standard to which he avowedly adjusts his aims and 
exertions, demands our earliest attention. If that be false, 
we have in no case a right to expect sound character. On 
what grounds can healthful legislation be expected of rulers, 
who unblushingly declare, that " the force of moral principle 
must be transgressed by the conventional rules of human 
society?" Who thus openly avow their allegiance to the 
grand usurper I And form themselves on the model of his 
character ? For this clearly is a declaration of war in the 
name of the Devil against the "only Potentate'' — the source 
and soul of all rightful authority. Whereever the arrange- 
ments of human society are adjusted to this declaration, and 
especially governmental arrangements, there loose reins are 
thrown upon the neck of passion, and evil under every form 



116 LIFE OF BIFiSEY. 

may be expected to luxuriate. — But to no such declaration 
can Mr. Birney subscribe. The God, in whom he believes 
is no "rhetorical nourish," adorning his creed without touch- 
ing his heart and controlling his conduct. He is a King,, 
wise and powerful, to whose authority it is our highest priv- 
ilege to bow, not merely in the catechisms, we may recite ; 
the sermons, we may preach ; the psalms, we may sing, but 
especially in our aims, exertions, and expectations. Every 
demand of His law, Mr. Birney regards as a duty, to whatever 
relation it may be applied — on whatever occasion it may be- 
asserted ; and duty with him is a sacred thing, not merely to 
be eloquently discoursed of, but to ha faithfully done; and this 
no more in private than in official life. It is his conviction, 
— a conviction, which he is not ashamed en the sravest oc- 
casions to express, " ' that there is no wisdom, nor under- 
standing, nor counsel against tlie Lord' — that no people can 
be permanently prosperous or happy, who in heart or prac- 
tice deny His right to reign on earth among men. He 
wholly repudiates any and every code founded on the per- 
nicious error, that the commandments of God may innocent- 
ly or advantageously be ' transgressed by the conventional 
rules of human society.' " 

An affectionate regard for the Divine authority, cherished 
in a manly soul, is the root of every human virtue. It is 
the secret of sound character. Wisdom, Strength, Beauty ; 
these are the natural fruits. Where this is, there you may 
find veracity, simplicity, modesty, candor; united with cour- 
age, decision, fidelity ; — there you may find disinterested- 
ness, generosity, and magnanimity. And we demand of 
those, who are best acquainted with him ; for which of 
these qualities is not James G. Birney remarkable ? In the 
prominent and characteristic transactions of his life, these 
qualities are beautifully blended. When convinced that 
slaveholding was in opposition to the Divine authority, what 
course did he pursue '{ Did he, still holding on to his pro- 
perty in slaves, try to satisfy his convictions by loud profes- 
sions and empty declamation 1 And while riveting the 
yoke on the negro's neck, did he prove his regard for Free- 
dom by inveighing against the oppressors of the Greeks and 
Poles ? And when pressed hard with the glaring inconsist- 
encies, by which such a course must be marked, did he take 
refuge in the distinction, the offspring of shallow brains and 
stony hearts, so dear to every hypocrite, hetween the abstract- 
and the 'practical I Not he. He embodied his convic- 
tions, in his doings. He applied his principles to the rela- 



LIFE OF BIRXEY. 117 

tions and objects, which lay in his own sphere of responsi- 
bility. He yielded lo his slaves at once and cheerfully — 
" without money and without price" — the God-given pre- 
rogatives, which they had been deprived of. No compensa- 
tion, not even applause, did he think himself entitled to. 
Having set them free, he gave them in acts of substantial 
kindness, the benefit of his wisdom and power — offering them 
counsel, affording them employment — assisting them in act- 
ing well their part in the new world, where he was at homo 
and they strangers. And after years of reflection did he 
repent of the sacrifices he had made to Justice and Human- 
ity ? No indeed. At the settlement of his father's estate 
he placed upon the same altar a still more costly sacrifice. 
At his own expense, he raised all his father's slaves to the 
dignity of freemen. That was James Ct. Birxey. 

The freedom of speech and the liberty of the Press were 
r assailed, rudely and malignantly ; and assailed just there 
where the welfare of the Republic was most vitally at stake 
— where of course their unembarrassed exercise was most 
imperiously demanded. All our fellow citizens were thus 
brought to" a test, by which their regard for their country 
was fairly tried. No man, who had a drop of healthful 
blood in his veins, would in any such case care a fig through 
what medium the stab was aimed at the heart of the Repub- 
lic. It would be to be expected, that the cunning and re- 
morseless tyrants, who would thrust a gag into their neigh- 
bors' mouths, would select for the experiment such as had 
for some reason or another been exposed to popular odium 
— such as without means of defense might easily be set 
upon by the rabble. But a true man would not permit him- 
self to be thrown off his guard by an artifice so stale and pitiful. 
However and whereever his country might be assailed, he 
would come to the rescue ; though in so doing he might be 
brought to the side of men, whose characters and designs he 
regarded with abhorrence. But how was it with our fellow 
citizens when they saw the freedom of speech and the liber- 
ty of the Press assailed ] How, especially with those, who 
occupied the high places of the Republic — who were gener-^ 
ally thought to be entitled to the strongest expressions of 
popular esteem and confidence l Did they come to the res- 
cue ] They ? They were but too generally the assailants 
— the very traitors, who had formed a conspiracy to dip their 
parricidal hands in their country's blood. They were for 
free speech and an unfettered Press in the abstract ; but 
practically, and especially where their own selfishness and 



US LIFE OF BiRXfiY. 

folly were by such means likely to be -expose*], they were 
against all such prerogatives. Where, therefore, they did 
not, as in multiplied instances they did, lead on the thought- 
less rabble here and there, to such acts of violence as might 
wrest away from their fellow citizens these inestimable 
rights and privileges, they regarded such enormities with 
secret satisfaction — refusing to lift a finger to vindicate the 
majesty and honor of the Laws, which they saw trampled 
under foot. Such was their regard for what they themselves 
pronounced essential to the welfare of their country. — But 
so it was not with James G. Birney. He rushed in between 
his country and the knives, which assassins were aiming at 
her bosom. The rights, which he saw invaded, he was re- 
solved to defend in the sphere of his responsibilities ; and to 
defend at any price — at all hazards. Without the liberty of 
speech and of the Press, he knew full well, that Freedom 
would be an empty name and nothing more. If he might i 
not Hue a freeman, a freeman he could die. That was a 
privilege, which the worst times could not wrest away. See 
how erect he stands amidst the cut-throats, by whom he was 
surrounded both in Kentucky and Ohio — wretches, who 
bade him hold his tongue or submit to lawless violence.— 
How calm, collected, dignified. He holds on his way im- 
pelled and sustained by conscious rectitude, and leaves his 
enemies to digest their spleen, and execute their threats ac- 
cording to their ability. To such men, and such men alone 
may we safely confide the keeping of those rights and privi- 
leges, which are the life-blood of the Republic. 

With the shattered remains of an estate, greatly reduced 
by the sacrifices, which he had made to Justice and Human- 
ity, Mr. Birney finds himself at home on a farm, on the very 
confines of civilization in Michigan. Many men there are, 
who speak well of manual labor in the abstract. "\\ hat atti- 
tudes and gestures, when they open their eloquent lips, in 
praise, say of the Ashland farmer ! But when did their hero 
ever touch manly toil in any form*-- when did he ever thus soil 
one of his lady-like fingers ] He, and such as he, are far- 
mers, who live daintily on the unrequited labors of the poor 
— who shamelessly force the sweat-drenched, heart-broken 
operative, to reap their fields without even a hope of remu- 
neration ! — The farmer of Saginaw honors manual labor 
after quite another fashion. He applies his own manly 
muscles to it, and " eats his bread through the sweat of his 
brow." Let his example in this respect attract general imi- 
tation and slavery must disappear at once and forever. 



LIFE OF RIRNEY. 119 

Hitherto our countrymen have committed their financial 
interests to those, who blast whatever they may touch in the- 
whole sphere of Political Economy; who have reduced 
3arge portions of the soil to sterility and desolation ; who 
have been the occasion of wide-spread bankruptcy ; who are 
never more in their element than when busily engaged in 
making beggars and selling children. Their liberties, they 
have intrusted with those, who pronounce " slavery the cor- 
ner-stone of the Republic;" decry the Declaration of Inde- 
pendence as a "rhetorical flourish ;" and reduce to chattel- 
ship as many of their brothers and sisters, as they can lay 
their hands on ! The protection of their lives they, have ex- 
pected at the hands of those, who commit murder on the 
slightest provocation and without the least symptoms of re- 
morse ; who would sacrifice hecatombs of men to a usage 
too absurd for any Bedlam to endure ! They have all alonp-, 
been looking to see the interests. of a sound morality a thriv- 
ing under the influence of gross, sensualists and shameless 
debauchees ! As if a bad private character were the best 
of all pledges for good public conduct! What infatua- 
tion ! When shall we, as a People, learn the lesson, which 
Wisdom itself has a thousand times repeated in our ears, 
that good men out of the good treasure of their hearts bring 
forth good things ; and that evil men out of the evil treasure 
can be expected only to increase the power and extend the 
sway of evil? Thus taught, we shall be sure, whether we 
are many or whethei we are few, so to wield- the elective 
franchise as to promo our own improvement and our 
country's welfare. I night, we shall welcome to our 

inmost hearts the i hich men, distinguished for in- 

tegrity, wisdom and re entitled to assert. This 

lesson once impres ; i < - it t of this Republic, and 

such men as Jam f.s 12 v . will occupy the high places 

of society, diflusun :nlluence and scattering rich 

benefits all around lj -"on dawn ! 



VIEWS 



OF 



AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 



IN ITS BEARING UPON 



AMERICAN SLAVERY. 



BY WILLIAM GOODELL. 



SECOND EDITION 



REVISED, WITH ADDITIONS. 



f *Tne Reasonableness of Law is the soul of Law." — ( Jenks.) Com. Law Mmr 



UT1CA, N. Y. 
PUBLISHED BY LAWSON & CHAPLI 
1845. 



Entered according to the Act of Congress, in the year }&45, by 
WILLIAM GOODELL, 
In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States, for the 
Northern District of New York. 



C. Van Bk-ithwtsen k Co., 
Printers, Albany. 



INTRODUCTION. 

Sure triumph of truth— Former construction of the British Constitution, by 
York, Talbot, Blackstone, and Mansfield-New construction involved in the 
decision of Lord Mansfield, in the Somerset Case, (1772)— Revolution in 
English Jurisprudence— Secret of that Revolution— Granville Sharpe— Origin 
and foundation of law, immutable and eternal. 

The main views I have presented will assuredly be con- 
demned, — and in that condemnation I read the sure presage 
of their prevalence. They will be condemned, in this sel- 
fish and bewildered world, because they are true, and they 
will ultimately triumph, for the same reason. The popular 
suffrage may determine whether they shall be received in 
time to pi'event the wreck of the present Federal Govern- 
ment: — but it can no more decide against their final recep- 
tion than it can decide against the final reception of any other 
truths of science, physical or moral. There is immortality 
in Truth. But all lies are doomed. 

Up to the month of May, 1772, it was as currently believed 
in England, that the slaves held and sold there, were thus 
held and sold, legally, and in accordance with the British 
Constitution, as it is now believed that the slaves held and 
sold in the United States of America, are thus held and sold, 
legally, and in accordance with the American Constitution. 
But the decision of Lord Chief Justice Mansfield, in 
the case of James Somerset, at the date above mentioned, 
revolutionized the jurisprudence of the realm, overthrew 
ancient precedents, reversed venerated decisions — and in- 
scribed beneath the cross of St. George, on the royal flag — 
M slaves can not breathe in England." 

And what was the secret of that mighty revolution? — It 
was this. — The simple foundation truth of all legitimate and 
valid jurisprudence, divine and human, that Right is author- 
ity — that reason is the soul of law, had obtained a lodgment 
in one human heart, that truly apprehended its meaning, and 



4 INTRODUCTION. 

did not hold it an idle abstraction. That heart was not the 
heart of a York or a Talbot, (the Attorney and Solicitor 
General of their day,) who, in 1729 had recorded their opin- 
ions in favor of the slave master's claim. It was not the 
heart of a titled judge, Dr. Blackstone, who, at a later day ? 
finding that a passage in his learned Commentaries was ef- 
fectively quoted, at pending trials, in favor of the rights of 
the enslaved, adroitly furnished a new and revised edition 
of them, in season to be used, triumphantly, during thetrials, 
by the slave master's counsel. It was not the heart of Sir 
James Eyre, Recorder of London ; who, when retained as 
counsel, on behalf of the oppressed, adduced, to dishearten 
his employer, the opinions of York and Talbot, and added 
that the Lord Chief Justice was agreed with them. It was 
not the heart of any one of those eminent lawyers who, when 
consulted by the friends of the enslaved, declared* " that the 
laws were against them." It was not the heart of that Lord 
Chief Justice Mansfield himself, whom history has ranked 
with "the most distinguished lawyers" of that age, and who 
along with'them, " crouched down beneath the lie" (of legal 
enslavement) and "affirmed its validity" — the same Lord 
Chief Justice, who in 1771 (one year before his own immor- 
tal decision against legal slavery) was so firmly attached tc 
the ancient precedents in its favor, as to refuse giving judg- 
ment against the noted kidnapper, Stapylton, when an hon- 
est jury had given verdict against him ; — that Chief Justice 
Mansfield, who, during this same Somerset trial, when over- 
powered by the argument for liberty, and dreading the pub- 
lic rebuke, delayed judgment, hesitated, sought, unsuccess- 
fully, to shun the issue, by beseeching the slave master to 
manumit the slave, and whose final decision (the boast and 
glory of his country) was delivered with a " lawyer-like cir- 
cumlocution" that betrayed the inward bent of his mind, 
and the reluctance with which he yielded to the claims of 
equity, and the rising voice of human nature.* 

* See Charles Stuart's Memoir of Granville Sharpe, which con tains in detail, 
the particulars above alluded to. 



INTRODUCTION. 



No? It was ivot to hearts like these, that the "soul" and 
vitality of British Constitutional Law, and of all law, were 
revealed ! It was reserved to Granville Shaupe, without 
rank, without office, without literary pretension, or legal 
erudition, in the face of all the law authorities of his age 
and nation, to plant himself upon the right and the true, to 
breast the current, almost single handed and alone, till he 
saw the Right prevail, and Mansfield officially announce 
it — and Blackstone condescendingly record and endorse it — 
thus rearing a column of glory under which their own 
learned lumber, with that of Talbot and York, lies buried 
out of sight, among rubbish of the dark ages! Thus shall 
it always be ! 

Whether my argument has been happily presented, time 
and the public voice must determine, though they can not 
nullify the truths I present. I only ask the candid reader to 
weigh the evidences of those truths. I will not dishonor 
his reason by asking him whether the reception and prac- 
tice of them would degrade our common humanity, or offend 
our benevolent Creator. There is neither legitimate au- 
thority, nor binding precedent, nor valid law, except in 
harmony with His will. Let the Yorks and the Talbots, 
the Blackstones and the Mansfields of America understand 
that : — and let them remember their relation to the people, 
to whom Divine Providence is rapidly teaching the alphabet 
of that sublime truth. It is for the people I have written ; — 
for the people, by the grace of God, and under his authority, 
free, independent and sovereign — the divinely appointed ar- 
biters of their own destinies, the students (if they will 
understand themselves) and the subjects, not the framers, 
nor yet the arbiters of those original laws, immutable and 
eternal, upon which human nature itself was modelled, 
and from the sure operation of which, no age, no nation, no 
race of men, ever escaped. 



GENERAL NOTE. 

In the preparation of these pages, I have had recourse to 
whatever, within my reach, was thought adapted to throw 
light on the topics under discussion. I have availed myself, 
freely, of the researches of my fellow-laborers, in the cause 
of human freedom, who, in their constitutional investio-a- 
tions, have preceded me. Very few of them have looked, 
however, in the direction at which I have aimed, and those 
few have confined their inquiries to only one or two points, 
and built their argument on much narrower grounds. The 
right to restrict slavery, on the admission of new States-the 
power of Congress over the Federal District and Territories, 
and over the inter State slave-trade-the constitutionality of 
the law of '93 — the obligation to return fugitive slaves — 
the right of trial by jury — the aggressions of the slave codes 
on the rights of the free States — the right of petition — the 
freedom of speech and of the press — these have been the 
more common topics of discussion, and the argument is per- 
haps exhausted, on the commonly occupied grounds. — In 
the field I have now entered, the marks of occupancy are 
comparatively sparse and new. Yet many implements 
wielded in other departments may find a place here. 



CHAPTER I. 
THE QUESTION AT ISSUE. 

Its meaning and magnitude— Impossibility of evasion— Testimony of Ameri- 
can Statesmen— Mo middle ground— Illustrative politics of the country— fctate 
action— Action of the Federal Government— The alternative. 

Do we live under a free government, or a despotism ? 
Does the organic law of our national government enable it 
to " establish justice ?" Or is it founded upon a " compro- 
mise" with injustice? Does it ''secure the blessings of 
liberty" to its founders and their "posterity,"* or does it 
guaranty the curses of slavery to large and increasing num- 
bers of them, and ensure the ultimate wreck of the whole 
nation's freedom ? Does it "form a more perfect union," 
or does it by " permitting one half of the citizens! to 
trample upon the rights of the other, transform those into 
despots, and these into enemies?" — thus drawing down up- 
on itself the "execration" of wise statesmen? Does it 
"ensure domestic tranquility," or does it "guaranty" or to- 
lerate by " compromise" the most perfect possible specimen 
of " domestic" disorder ? Does it " provide for the common 
defence," or does it "compromise" the security of the most 
defenceless of its citizens — " guaranty" or permit the suc- 
cessful invasion of all their rights, and "guaranty" likewise, 
or permit, by " compromise" the well known cause of all 
our great exposure to internal commotion — the admitted and 
insuperable obstacle to any effective defence against a fo- 
reign invasion, by a "third rate maritime power ?" Does 
it "provide for the general welfare," or does it " compro- 
mise" that welfare, " guaranty" its deadliest enemy, and 
bind its citizens to stand ready, at a moment's warning, to 
engage in a bloody contest against liberty, against their 
own declaration of self-evident truths, against man's 
inalienable rights — " a contest" in which " no attribute of 
the Almighty could take sides with them ?" Is it a gov- 
ernment in favor of human improvement, human liberty, 
and human happiness, or against them? In favor of virtue 

* "The noblest blood of Virginia runs in the veins of slaves." 
t In this expression of Jefferson, observe the conceded citizenship of the en- 
slaved. — Are American citizens enslaved legally? And without a violation of 



the American Constitution ? 



8 AMEBICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

and morality or against them ? Is it a government in ac- 
cordance with the Divine will or against it ? 

These questions are propounded, not in respect to any, or 
to all the successive administrations of the national govern- 
ment, but in regard to its original organic structure — its 
inherent nature and character — its Constitutional Law 

Is the Constitution of the United States, rightly expound- 
ed, in favor of liberty or against it ? In favor of slavery or 
against it ? Does it " secure liberty" and accordingly pro- 
hibit its opposite — slavery ? Or does it rest upon a " com- 
promise" with slavery, or a " guaranty" of slavery, and 
therefore " compromise" the question of liberty, or " guar- 
anty" its downfall ? 

In other words, is the Constitution of the United States, 
in truth and reality, what it professes, in its Preamble, to 
be — or is it, at bottom, the very opposite of its high profes- 
sions ? Is it a delusion — a deception — a fiction — a sham ? 
Should the friends of liberty, of human nature, and of the 
loving Father of human nature, cling to, and cherish it? 
Should they labor to disabuse it, and wield it, for its pro- 
fessed and its real ends?— Or on the other hand, should 
they abandon all hope from that quarter ? Should they ex- 
pect from it, (faithfully administered, and in accordance 
with its true character,) no desirable union, no establishment 
of justice, no assurance of domestic tranquility, no provision 
for the common defence, no promotion of the general wel- 
fare, no guaranty of the blessings of liberty to themselves 
and their posterity ? Is it incapable of securing those " in- 
alienable rights, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"— 
for the securing of which, governments are instituted among 
men, deriving their just powers (under God) " from the con- 
sent of the governed?" Are its powers too "limited" to 
"secure" those rights ? Does it " compromise" and has it 
therefore "become destructive of these ends?" And is it 
accordingly, "the right of the people to alter or to abolish 
it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundation 
on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, 
as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and 
happiness?" Is the right of revolution our only avenue to 
the security of all those other rights which our forefathers 
sought to secure and perpetuate, when in their enterprise of 
founding a new government, they " appealed to the Supreme 
Judge of the world for the rectitude of their intentions" and 
" mutually pledged to each other, their lives>their fortunes, 
and their sacred honor?" 



chap. i.— the question at issue. 9 

Impossibility of Evasion. 

The point and significancy of these questions are not to 
be evaded or turned aside, by the customary references made 
to the peculiar structure of our government — the limitations 
of the Federal authority— the unimpaired sovereignty of the 
several States- — the alleged " compromises" . or "guaran- 
ties" essential to the adoption of the Federal Constitution, 
in the first place, or to a continuance of the Union cemented 
by it, now On all these points, and on all others of the 
same complexion, the persons who bring them forward may 
make such statements as they may think proper — may adopt 
such iheories as they may prefer, and for the argument's 
sake, (so far as the positions of this chapter are concerned) 
we may admit either one, or another, or all, of those state- 
ments and theories to be correct — without changing or mod- 
ifying, in the slightest degree, the issue we have made up, 
and presented. Such considerations can not change or avert 
the issue, though they may help to decide it. 

The question is, whether the structure of our National 
Government, (whatever it may be, in detail, and whatever 
circumstances may have shaped it) is such, in matter of fact, 
as to enable it to "secure liberty" and repress despotism? 
Whether it can protect human rights, and prevent violations 
of them ? — Whether it is competent to do the things promised 
to the People, and to posterity, in its Preamble? Or whe- 
ther, from any cause, it is so "limited" — "balanced" — 
"compromised," "guarantied," crippled, forestalled, fet- 
tered, thumb-screwed, and gagged, that it can do nothing 
of the kind? 

Is it, what it professes to be, a civil government, empow- 
ered to " establish justice" (to "execute judgment between 
a man and his neighbor") " to ensure domestic tranquility, 
provide for the common defence, and secure the blessings 
of liberty to ourselves, and our posterity ?" Or on the "other 
hand, was there a mistake made, in supposing that the pro- 
visions of the Constitution in detail, were such as to permit 
and enable the Government to accomplish these high ends? 

It has, somehow, come to pass that the people of the 
twenty-six States constitute one nation — and are bound up, 
in one and the same destiny. This is the admitted fact. It 
is claimed, too, that the Federal Constitution contains a de- 
scription of the arrangements by which they are thus bound. 
What are those arrangements ? Do they describe a civil 
government ? Or only a confederacy ? Or a treaty between 
disunited States ? If they describe (as will be conceded by 



10 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

most men) a civil government over United Stales — what is 
that government, in the essential elements*of its character? 
Is it a free government or a despotism ? Is it in favor of 
liberty or of slavery ? — Both, ox neither, it can not be. One 
or the other, it undoubtedly IS. 

If we have a civil government, deserving the name, item- 
bodies, of course, the vital elements of all valid civil gov- 
ernment. What these elements are, we shall consider as we 
proceed; — If we have what -professes to be a civil govern- 
ment, and yet lacks these vital elements, it is high time we 
had detected the cheat. We pay enough for the support of it, 
to feel ourselves entitled to the benefits it has promised us. 
If it can not yield them, let us know the worst of the case, 
and either get along without having our work done at such 
vast expense, or get better help, for our money. 

The more successful any persons may be, in making it 
appear a plain case that the peculiar structure of our Go- 
vernment, the limitations of the Federal authority, the un- 
impaired sovereignty of the States, the guaranties or the 
compromises of the Constitution, the implied understanding 
of the contracting parties, or any thing else, has put it out of 
the power of the National Government to "establish justice ," 
"secure the blessings of liberty;' (including of course, the 
suppression of injustice, and of tyranny,) the more successful 
of course, they will be, in proving that the experiment of 
liberty, under our present Constitution, is a failure, that its 
place must be supplied by a better, or that civil and religious 
liberty must be relinquished. Such a construction of the 
Constitution loads it with n millstone that must sink it— and 
sink the American People with it, unless they speedily cut 
themselves loose from it. 

To say as some do, that the National Government, in its 
organic structure, is neutral on the question of liberty or 
slavery, is directly to contradict its express professions. It 
is moreover a statement of that which is impossible in the 
nature of things. But were the statement never so correct, 
such a fact would decide the question that the Constitution 
and the National Government are worthless, unable to fulfil 
their high promises, or do otherwise than disappoint the ex- 
pectations based upon them. 

To represent, as do others, that the Constitution is partly 
in favor of liberty; and partly in favor of slavery, is to re- 
present that it is a house divided%gainst itself which can not 
stand. To say that it is in favor of general liberty and par- 
tial bondage, is to say that it is in favor of a known impossi- 



CHAP. I. — THE QUESTION AT ISSUE. H 

bility, that can never be atttained. To say that it cnn secure 
general 'liberty , jfnd at the same time guaranty local slavery, 
or even compromise or permit its existence, is to affirm the 
greatest of moral absurdities, to deny self-evident truths, to 
falsify human history, to libel the unity of human nature, to 
profess a disbelief of ^Jae first axioms of political science — 
the connection between moral cause and effect: — It is to 
insult the common sense and moral perceptions of an intel- 
ligent and free People. 

Testimony of American Statesmen. 

• In unison with these statements, and with the implication 
that the power of the National Government, (if it has any) 
% to " secure the blessings of liberty" is, of necessity, the 
power to abolish slavery, we cite a few extracts from the 
writings of eminent American statesmen. 

Thomas Jefferson. — "And can the liberties of a nation be thought sect-re 
when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the miiuls of the 
people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated 
but with his wrath ? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that 'God is 
just, th;tt his justice can not sleep forever.' " 

"When the measure of their tears shall be full— when their trms shall 
have involved heaven itself in darkness— doubtless a God of justice will awaken 
to their distress, and by diiTusinga lightand liberality among their oppressors, 
or, at length, by his exterminating thunder, manitest his attention to the things 
of this world, and that they are not left to the guidance of a blind fatality."— 
Notes on Virginia, 

In the same connection, Mr. Jefferson describes the 
whole commerce between master and slave to be " the most 
unremitting despotism on the one part and degrading sub- 
missions on the other" — and affirms that the child of a slave- 
holding parent — " nursed, educated, and daily exercised in 
tyranny, can not but be stamped by it with odious peculiar- 
ities." — Can these " educated tyrants''' understand and guard 
civil liberty ? Can they be the rulers of a free People? 

William Pinckney.— " For my own part, 1 have no hope that the stream of 
general liberty will flow forever, unpol uted, through the mire of partial bon- 
dage, or that those who have been habituated to lord it over others, will not, in 
time, become base enough to let others lord it over them. If they resist, it will 
be the struggle of pride and selfishness, not of principle."— Speech in the Mary- 
land House of Delegates, 17S9. 

John Jay — " Till America comes into this measure [the abolition of slavery] 
her prayers to Heaven" (i.e. for liberty) " will be impious. This is a strong ex- 
pression, but it is just."—" I believe God governs the world, and 1 believe it to 
be a maxim in his, as in our court, that he who asks for jusiice must do it."— 
Letter from Spain, 17S0- 

The doctrine of Jefferson, of Jay, and of Pinckney, is ev- 
idently this : — Liberty can not be secure in a country where 
there is slavery : — they are opposites and can not harmonize. 



12 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

One or the other must give place to its antagonist. God 
will not give liberty to a people who permit slavery. 

If it be said, of any government, that it can not abolish slave- 
ry^ in the country over which it is established, the meaning 
of the statement, if it have any intelligible meaning, must 
be, that such government can not 'Secure the blessings of 
liberty" to the country over which it is established. If the 
abolition of slavery be left wholly to " moral suasion," then 
the preservation of liberty is left wholly to moral suasion, 
and the functions of civil government cease. No arrange- 
ments, influences, or machinery of any kind, can do more to 
diffuse light, than they can to dispel darkness ; to secure 
warmth, than to prevent cold ; to " secure liberty," than tft 
abolish slavery. Can any truisms be more self-evident than 
these? , 

If the whole question of slavery is left, exclusively, to the 
State Governments, then the whole question of liberty is left 
exclusively to the State Governments, and the National Gov- 
ernment becomes a mere nose of wax — the fifth wheel to 
the coach, a nullity by which no man can be bound. 

Further testimony might be cited, from prominent states- 
men and literary gentlemen, by no means obnoxious to the 
charge of prejudice against slavery, or under zeal for its 
abolition. Speeches in Congress, and in State Conventions, 
Governors' Messages, Resolutions of State Legislatures, &c, 
&c, abound in varied expressions and implications of the 
sentiment that the continuance of slavery involves its virtual 
extension, in some form, over the mass of the laboring po-pu* 
lation of the country at large. In the same connection with 
arguments for the perpetuity of slavery, and demands for 
the suppression of efforts for its overthrow, it has been urged, 
from these high sources, that "those who earn their daily 
bread by the sweat of their brows can never enter into po- 
litical affairs,"* that " the relation between the capitalist 
and the laborer, in the South is kinder nnd more productive 
of genuine attachment, than exists between the same classes, 
any where else on the globe, "t that K gentlemen" (Repre- 
sentatives in Congress) " from the North, must not start at 
this truth," that " one class" of citizens must practically and 
substantially own another class, in some shape or form"t 
— that while the non-slaveholding States " it is hoped" will 
be prompt to suppress " Anti-Slavery Societies" — " the sober 
and considerate portion of the citizens of the non-slavehold* 

* Benjamin Watkins Leigh, Speech in Virginia Convention for amending the 
Constitution, 1829. — f Prof. Dew, of William and Mary's College, Va.— t Hon. 
Mr. Pickens, Speech in Congress, Jan. 183C. 



CHAP. I. THE QUESTION AT ISSUE. 13 

ing States will reflect whether the form in which slavery- 
exists in the South, is not one modification of the universal 
condition of laborers," who "with few exceptions," have as 
little " volition or agency in the distribution of wealth" as 
the slaves of the South — that the system of labor among 
freemen, is " not less oppressive" than that among slaves* — 
that " the South has less trouble with their slaves, than the 
North has with her free laborers"! — that where menial ser- 
vices " are performed, by members of the political commu- 
nity, a dangerous element is introduced into the body poli- 
tic" — that the slaves if emancipated " bleached or un- 
bleached" — and admitted to "an equal participation of our 
political privileges" would exhibit " a revolting spectacle" — 
that "slavery supersedes the necessity of an order of nobi- 
lity" — and is " the corner stone of our republican edifice" — 
that "it will be fortunate for the non-slaveholding States, if 
they are not, in less than a quarter of a century, driven to 
the adoption of a similar institution, or take refuge from 
robbery and anarchy, under a military despotism, "$ — that 
the abolition of slavery, "gradual or immediate" is rendered 
impossible by "the absolute want of 'power on the part of the 
General Government," and by "the immense amount of 
capital which is invested in slave property" — that the "dog- 
ma" is " visionary — which holds that negro slaves can not 
be the subject of property" — that " that is property which 
the law declares to be property" — that " two hundred years 
have sanctioned and sanctified negro slaves to be property" 
— that " the moment the incontestible fact is admitted that 
negro slaves are property, the law of moveable property 
attaches itself to them, and secures the right of carrying 
them from one State to another, where they are recognized 
as property" — that "the consequences of abolishing slavery, 
were the measure possible, would be such that abolitionists 
themselves would shrink back in dismay and horror" from 
them — that " in the progress of time, some erne hundred and 
fifty or two hundred years hence, but few vestiges of the 
BLACK race will remain, among OUR posterity "II so that 
the interminable slavery, so long " sanctioned and sancti- 
fied" — so " incontestibly" identified with the right of " move- 
able property," thus securing perpetuity to the domestic 
slave trade, and with the whole North, (under the law of 
'93) as its hunting ground, without jury trial, — a slavery 

*Hon. John C. Calhoun's Mail Report, U. S. Senate, Feb, 1S36, and aecrptedby 
that body.— f Mr. Hammond, of South Carolina, Speech in Congress —{Message 
of Gov. McDuffie to the Legislature of South Carolina, and approved and acted 
upon by that body.— H Speech of Hon. Henry Clay, in the U. S. Senate, Feb. 7, 



14 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

and a slave-trade which the General Government has no 
power to terminate — and which none of the State Legisla- 
tures, (by the late decision of the Supreme Court of the 
United States)* has a right to exclude from the field of 
their jurisdiction — is a slavery and a slave-trade to be per- 
petuated -AMONG OUR POSTERITY"— "with but 
FEW VESTIGES of the black race" remaining ! 
No Middle Ground. 

Let the assumed premises of Mr. Clay be conceded to him, 
(viz:) the right of property in man, under American Consti- 
tutional Law — the legality of slavery in America, including 
the inter State slave-trade under the Constitution of the 
United States, and the " absolute want of power on the part 
of the General Government" to abolish this American slave- 
ry and slave-trade, and all the rest of his argument, with its 
tremendous conclusion, follows of course, unless a ray of 
hope might reach us from the good will and pleasure of the 
legislatures of the slave States themselves.! 

Not less logical and demonstrative are the conclusions of 
Gov. McDufne's Message, paradoxical and extravagant as 
they may seem, unless we start, in the outset of the argu- 
ment, upon the opposite principle, and affirm that American 
Constitutional Law regards "allmen" "bleached or unbleach- 
ed" as "created equal, and endowed by their Creator with 
certain inalienable rights — life, liberty and the pursuit of 
happiness." — On another assumption, it is manifest that 
our Government regards men as unequal: and if this be 
true, it is evident that cc?iditio7iD.ud not color, (according to 
both Clay and McDuffie,) must ultimately become the sole 
distinction between the privileged and the servile. 

Every government is based upon some principle — is based 
upon either one or the other of two principles — the principle 
of human equality; or the principle of huma,n inequality, of 
domination and subjection. If the American Government is 

* Decision in the case of Prigg vs. the State of Pennsylvania. 

t It seems not quite certain that a little variation and extension of the same 
argument would not almost equally remove from the legislatures of the slave 
States themselves, the power of abolishingslavery — a position not onfrequently 
held, at the South.— The " ineontcstible" right of" moveable property" so long 
" sanctioned and sanctified" would present very grave claims, in the eyes of 
statesmen who hold the views of Mr. Clay. And then, if the Constitution ofthe 
United States, " the supreme law of the land"—" guaranties" that same right 
of propeny, and may ride, rough shod, over the legislatures of the non-slav-e- 
holdina Stale-;, and convert the whole North into the hunting ground of the 
slaveholder, to make that "guaranty" good, how will it be made to appear 
that the same " guaranty" does not extend over all the States in the Union, and 
forbid Southern legislatures to do what NoTthcrn legislatures may not ? Mip- 
pose Maryland should piss an act abolishing slavery —Would not the same de- 
cision ofthe Uni'<Ml States Court, that now prevents Pennsylvania from execu- 
ting its act of abolition, prevent -Miry land, likewise, from doing the same thing? 



CHAP. I. THE QUESTION AT ISSUE. 15 

not based upon rhe principle of human equality, then it is 
based upon the principle of human inequality ; and the de- 
gradation of the laboring masses, whom color can not iden- 
tify, becomes, (as McDuffie hath it,) the corner stone of the 
entire structure. Those who contend for the " guaranties" 
and the " compromises of the Constitution" in favor of slave- 
ry, or its toleration, contend (whether they know it or not) 
for the pith and essence of the very doctrine, so offensive 
to many, when stated in the bold and forcible language of 
the Governor and Legislature of South Carolina. 

Illustrative Politics of the Country — State Action. 

The meaning of the question before us, is thus definitely 
fixed. On its magnitude, the reader may reflect at his leis- 
ure. On that topic we can not enlarge. Suffice it to sug- 
gest, that both the meaning and the magnitude of the ques- 
tion have their amplest illustrations in the past and passing 
political history of the country at large. 

The legislative action of the slaveholding States looks 
distinctly and marches steadily to the suppression of general 
liberty, both within their own boundaries, and throughout 
the States of the Union. 

In direct violation of their own State Constitutions, free- 
dom of speech and of the press are proscribed, and in espe- 
cial reference to all attempted promulgation of the doctrine 
of human rights ! 

In Louisiana.—" If any person shrill use any language from the bar_ bench, 
stage,or pulpit, or any other place, "[including halls of legislation] "or hold any 
conversation having a tendency to promote discontent amongr^EE colored peo- 
ple, or insubordination among slaves, he may be imprisoned at hard labor, not 
less than three, nor more than twenty-one years, or he may suffer DEATH at 
the discretion of the Court." 

Similar legislation obtains in Mississippi, North Carolina, 
Georgia, Virginia, &c. And these laws are not a dead let- 
ter. A member of Congress from Tennessee,* in a letter 
to a Northern Editor, requested him to send him no papers 
of a certain description, (and consisting of a Review of a 
Report of Mr. Calhoun, 'in the United States Senate,) after 
he should have returned home to his constituents, because 
his receiving it through the mails, and reading it, at his 
family fire-side, would be a penitentiary offence. 

Legislatures and Governors of slaveholding States have 
offered large rewards for the abduction of free citizens ot 
the non-slaveholding States, and carrying them to the South, 
to be tried and punished there, for advocating human rights, 
in their own States, and no legislature of a non-slaveholding 

* Mr. Hunter. 



16 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

State, has, in any way, noticed the insult ! — Demands have 
been made on the Governors of non-slaveholding States, for 
the delivery of such offenders, and also on their legislatures, 
for penal enactments against free speech at home. In di- 
rect violation of the Constitution of the United States, free 
citizens of other States, sojourning in the slave States, are 
liable, if colored, to be seized, imprisoned, and sold into 
slavery — or (whether white or colored) if maintaining the 
"self-evident truths" of the Declaration of Independence, 
to be punished with death. 

Action of the Federal Government. 

The history of the action of the Federal Government, 
under all our successive Presidents, is strikingly illustrative 
of our position, that the Constitution must either be con- 
strued against slavery, or in its favor— against slavery or 
against general freedom. 

To those who differ from me on this great question, I 
freely yield all the benefits of a concession of the fact that 
hitherto, the Constitution has been construed, in opposition 
to the views I maintain :~has been construed, in favor of 
the "compromise" and the "guaranty" of domestic slavery 
— has been thus construed by the Legislative, Executive, 
and Judicial authorities of the nation. But along with this 
concession, I shall insist that the hitherto reigning construc- 
tion, as exemplified in the steady action of the Federal Gov- 
ernment, in all its departments, is a construction that makes 
the security of slavery, and not the security of liberty, (the 
profession of the Preamble) the grand and paramount object 
of the National Government — is a construction that has led 
all the rival statesmen, administrations, and parties who have 
held it, to pursue steadily, amid all their otherwise conflict- 
ing measures and fluctuating policy, the aggrandizement of 
slavery at the expense of liberty; a construction that has 
led the Legislature, the Executive, and the Judiciary, to do 
the bidding of the slave power, at whatever expense, or 
hazard, to the interests, the reputation, or the liberties of 
the People. 

For the facts involved in this declaration, it were sufficient 
to cite the reader to — " A View of the Action of the Federal 
Government, in behalf of Slavery, by William Jay," and to 
those new developments of the same action, which, every 
year, and almost every month, are opening before our eyes, 
For a philosophical solution of those phenomena, it is enough 
to bear in mind the construction of the Federal Constitution 






CHAP. I. THE QUESTION AT ISSUE. 17 

that "looks in the very same direction, and to consider that 
those who think the Constitution to be in favor of slavery, 
will be very likely to administer it in favor of slavery, what- 
ever may be said against the justice or the policy of their 
measures. If the common construction be the correct one, 
we have no remedy for the policy of the last half century, 
but a different Constitution, or an administration that will 
disregard the provisions of the existing- one ; a consideration 
to which our attention has not unfrequently been called by 
those who object to the ballot box as a means of removing 
slavery. 

Admitting the common construction to be correct, submis- 
sion or revolution are the only alternatives left to us ; .and 
both in turn are the probable, the almost inevitable lot of 
this People. The total loss of our liberties will come first, 
and the bloody recovery of them afterwards. Our destiny 
is before us, and we must float on, till it is fulfilled. Be it 
so, that we live under a National Government, at war with 
our dearest rights, a Government that taxes us for the ac- 
quisition of new territory, whereon to plant new batteries 
against our liberties — that moulds our naturalization laws in 
the manner best adapted to enslave native freemen — that 
shapes its ever fluctuating political economy, so as may best, 
for the time being, divert the avails of free labor from the 
laborer to the lordling — that employs the expensive diplo- 
macy of the nation to its own infamy — that pretends to pro- 
hibit the African slave-trade, but winks at its successful 
prosecution— that plots against the liberties of South Amer- 
ica and of Cuba, lest the infection of their liberty should 
enable the North American States to become truly free — 
that with indecent eagerness hastens to take by the hand, 
and hug to its bosom, nay, to incorporate with itself, the 
piratical despotism of Texas, at the cost of a war with Mex- 
ico; while it refuses, for forty years, at a sacrifice of well 
known public benefits, to recognize the independence of lib- 
erated Hayti — that authorizes slavery, the slave-trade, and 
the public sale of freemen, on the national hearth-stone, the 
home and the habitation of its own " exclusive" jurisdiction 
— that defines the condition of the American slave, by deny- 
ing to him even the Asiatic right of petition, then declares 
that right forfeited by all the believers in inalienable human 
lights, and next to be held by the entire American people, 
only by Presidential permission — that by its law of 1793, 
for the arrest of alleged fugitives from slavery, annuls the 
trial by jury, and (by recent decision of its Supreme Court) 

2 



19 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

suspends the freedom or the chattelhood of its Supreme 
Judges themselves, not upon " due process of law," but 
upon the good pleasure of the slaveholder that may choose 
to claim them as slaves. Be it so that all this decisive and 
even fatal action against general liberty, is the action of our 
own National Govornment in which we have confided, to 
"secure the blessi?igs of liberty" — ivhat then ? If the founda- 
tion principles of the Federal Government require all this 
to be done, as they undoubtedly do, if " the Constitution 
guaranties slavery" — or if they permit all this to be done, as 
they certainly do, if, by a "compromise they permit slave- 
ry — then we have either to get rid of such/z Federal Gov- 
ernment, or relinquish our liberties. 

The wit of man may be challenged to devise another al- 
ternative. American Constitutional Law is either against 
slavery or in favor of it. Both at the same time or neither, 
it can not be. One or the other it is, and must be. If it 
tolerates partial slavery, it betrays and sacrifices general 
freedom; — for general freedom and partial slavery, can no 
longer, even dubiously, contest the supremacy. At this very 
moment, liberty trembles, and is ready to fall, if she maybe 
said even now to exist. Under the present Constitution, is 
there any hope for her? We proceed to the discussion of 
THAT QUESTION. 



CHAPTER II.. 

« STRICT CONSTRUCTION." 

The Constitution of 17S7-9. Considered on the Principle 
of Strict Construction. 

SECTION I. 

THE CLAIMS OF SLAVERY. 

Modern date of the supposed compromise— Remarkable process proving 
it— Strict, construction defined—" Persons held to service and labor"— Appor- 
tionment of representatives and direct taxes— Migration and importation — 
Suppression of insurrection — Protection against domestic violence — Reserved 
rights of the States. 

THE CLAIM — ITS CHRONOLOGY ITS TEXTURE AND ITS TACTICS. 

Those who claim the "compromises" and the "guaranties" 
of the Constitution in support of slavery, do soon the ground 
of the provisions of the Constitution of the United States, 
formed by a Convention held for that purpose, in 1787, rat- 



CHAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 19 

ified by the requisite proportion of the States, in 1737-8, 
and going into operation by the organization of the present 
Federal Government under it, in 1789. And this claim is 
seldom made out, from the provisions of that instrument it- 
self, to the satisfaction of the claimants themselves, without 
lugging in, what is claimed to be the " implied understand- 
ing" of the supposed parties to the "compact" — an under- 
standing, without which it is assumed, the assent of the 
slave States to the Constitution, could not have been gained. 

But beyond the Constitution of 17S7-9 and the aUendant 
circumstances of its formation and adoption, the claimants 
are not accustomed to adventure. We have never heard 
the old Articlesof Confederation cited in proof that any such 
compact, compromise, guaranty, or understanding, lay at the 
bottom of that arrangement, or even existed, at that date, in 
any form. The Declaration of Independence, the principles 
of Common Law, the inherent, matter-of-fact, unwritten 
Constitution, the organic frame-work and structure of free 
government, itself, of civil government, of any sort, have 
never, so far as we know, been attempted to be pressed into 
the service of the M peculiar institution" of the South. No- 
thing of this. Its Magna Charta of Runny Meade, its Gen- 
esis, so far as any national "compact" — "compromise" — 
"'guaranty," or " understanding" are concerned, claims no 
earlier date than 1787-9, 

It is a matter of some importance to note distinctly, this 
fact, as it shows to how narrow a chronological field, the 
claim in question, is confined. We became an independent 
nation — one nation — " United States" in 1776, but no man 
claims any national compact, compromise, guaranty, or un- 
derstanding, in favor of slavery, till 1787-9. 

Another remarkable feature of this claim, is its inability 
to slr»pe itself into any tolerable conformity with even its 
own beau ideal, or model of a seemly or valid claim, by the 
process of a consistent and continued adherence to any re- 
cognized principle of interpretation by which, on all other 
questions, the meaning of this national document, in partic- 
ular, or of any other similar instrument, is supposed to be 
ascertainable. 

The claimants of these "compromises, compacts, guaran- 
ties, and understandings," never think of making out their 
claim by taking the well known rule of strict construction, 
and adhering to that rule, till the claim is logically proved. 
Nor, on the other hand, will they venture the experiment of 
taking the rival principle of interpretation according to the 
scope, design, leading object, or " spirit of the Constitution" 



20 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

and making out their claim in. harmonious accordance with 
that principle. 

Instead of this, they never fail to present an argument made 
up of a motley patch-work, of which "strict construction" is 
claimed to have furnished some of the shreds, too tattered 
and thin indeed to hang together, or shut out the sunlight, 
without a plentiful lining of supposed intentions, yet carefully 
excluding the grand intention to "secure liberty" from com- 
ing into the interpretation, lest " that which is put in, to fill 
it up, take from the garment, and the rent be made worse." 
The argument commonly begins by insisting that the mir 
nutest specifications of the document shall be strictly and lit- 
erally complied with, that not one iota or tittle of the detail- 
ed provisions of the Constitution shall be suffered to fail, 
though the known and openly avowed end and object, the 
main purpose, and spirit of the instrument, which gave it 
existence, should be nullified, should suffer defeat, and be 
relinquished. But in order to make out the needed construc- 
tion of the specific provision itself, in the absence of the ap- 
propriate words and phrases to express the pretended "com- 
pact, compromise, and guaranty" — (yes! — in the presence 
of words positively adverse in their strict, literal import, to 
any expression of that kind,) resort is instantly had to suppos- 
ed intentions and "understandings" to eke out the construc- 
tion ! The declared intent to "secure liberty" shall have 
no power to help construe, to qualify, much less to set aside 
a technicality that can be read, by the literal import, to favor 
the " peculiar institution" of slavery. The dead-letter con- 
struction shall be held omnipotent here. But let it be shown 
that the "words of the bond" do not happen, exactly to spe- 
cify, to describe, much less io?ia??ie the very " peculiar" thing 
claimed to be guarantied or compromised, behold ! the dead- 
letter construction is repudiated, at once, and supposed and 
conjectural intentions to secure slavery start up in its place,, 
and become Constitutional Law !* 

A Standing Point, and an Umpire. 

Against this backing and filling, this fluctuating, sliding 
process of constitutional interpretation, we record our pro- 
test, in the outset. The " peculiar" claim, with all the 

* When it is remembered that our most popular ''• expounders of the Constitu- 
tion" have been accustomed to reason in this manner— That Presidents' Mes-- 
sages, Acts of Congress and Judicial decisions have been framed upon the fra- 
gile basis of such adroit and nimble gyrations, dignified with the name of expo- 
sitions and palmed off upon a confiding people for Constitutional Law, we may 
safely infer that a true exposition of the Constitution, whatever it may be : must 
conflict with the now prevalent one —Mr. Clay's Speech in the Senate, Pinck- 
r.i non's and Calhoun's Reports, the Act of 1793, and the lnte decision of 
the Supreme Court, furnish instances in abundance ol these deceptive manoeu- 
vres. 



CHAP. II, — STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 21 

amiabilities and attractives attached to it, shall have its fair 
hearing, in Court. Certainly it shall. But, like all other 
claimants, it must define its position, and retain it, long 
z enough to have its merits properh canvassed and adjudicat- 

ed. It may choose the " spirit of the Constitution'" as a rule 
; of interpretation, or the rule of "strict construction,'" as it 

judges most prudent. But, having made its own selection, 
it must content itself to remain in the same Courts till the 
A r erdict is rendered. Even more than all this, we shall con- 
cede to it : for the truth can afford to be liberal. The claim 
I of constitutional slavery shall have leave to urge its merits 

upon loth the principles of interpretation, "strict construc- 
I tion," first, and " spirit of the Constitution" afterwards, not 

L Vtj flying from the one to the other in the same plea, but trying 
[ its cause in both Courts, in succession. If the claim can be 

sustained, on the principle of " strict construction" alone, let 
- it have the benefit of the verdict. But if it finds itself de- 
feated on that ground then let it appeal to the " spirit of the 
~ Constitution" and see whether it can get the judgment re- 

■ versed. But let it not pack its jury from both Courts, at 
i the same trial. Nothing can be fairer than this challenge. 

On this basis we proceed. And as the claimants always 
yrmmence their suit, at the Court of " strict construction" we 

■ will meet them there first. Let them not dodge, till "strict 
^construction' -1 shall have pronounced judgment. They may 

then file their appeal, if they shall have occasion. 

" Persons held to Service and Labor." 

"No person held to service or labor in one State ; under the laws thereof, 
escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, 
be discharged from such service or labor ; but shall be delivered up on claim 
of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.— Constitutioru Art. IV. 
Scetion Q, Clause 3. 

Who, unacquainted with the facts that hava taken place, 
with the past and daily passing history df this country, 
would ever have conceived that these words described the 
case of a fugitive slave, and required his delivery to the 
slaveholder? No one! Yet such is the claim set up, un- 
der this clause ! But " strict construction" allows no re- 
ference to past or passing events, for a key to the meaning 
of the document. It insists that the words of the instrument, 
the literal words, according to their commonly received and 
authorized import, and nothing but the words shall be allow- 
ed to -el! us the meaning of the Constitution. It rules the 
Historian a;.:l the News Journalist out of the witness-box, 
and installs -|.o Grammarian and the Lexicographer in their 
stead. To their testimony we will now attend. 

Mr. Grammarian — Please to Sparse" for the Court and 



i 



I 



22 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

Jury, this third clause of the second section of the fourth 
article of the Constitution of the United States. And tell 
us by the rules of grammar, who it is, that "shall be deliv- 
ered up," &c, under this clause. 

Mr. Grammarian purses the sentence, and thus gravely 
responds — " According to the principles of grammar as 
taught by Murray, Smith, Kirkham, &c, it appears that — 
11 No person held to service or labor in one State, under the 
laws thereof, escaping into another ***** shall 
be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service 
or labor may be due !"* 

Very satisfactory testimony, for the claimant, to be sure, 
but "strict construction" records the testimony of Mr. Gram- 
marian, nevertheless! As counsel for the fugitive, I can 
afford to pass it over in my plea. I have evidence enough 
without it, but on the principles of " strict construction" I 
have a right to use it, if I please. Why not? — By bringing 
his suit into the Court of "strict construction" the claim- 
ant insists that the Grammar and the Lexicon, the dead- 
letter of the record, however subversive of equity, or of the 
meaning intended by the framers of the instrument, shall 
govern the decision to be made. Why then, may I not take 
him at his word? 

We will dismiss the Grammarian, and summon the Lex- 
icographer to the stand. We wish to know the meaning of 
the words employed in this clause. The enslaver claims 
that the word "person" means slave. To test this claim we 
must know the meaning of the word " person" and the 
meaning of the word "slave" and see how they correspond. 
Noah Webster knows the meaning of words. — Mr. Webster 
— what is the meaning of the word "person?" Please to 
define it for the Court and Jury. 

Answer. — " Person. An individual human being, con- 
sisting of body and soul. A man, woman, or child, consid- 
ercd as opposed to things, or distinct from them." — Webster's 
Dictionary. 

The testimony is noted down by the Court. — Mr. Webster 
retires. — "The peculiar" meaning of the word slave, as un- 
derstood by those who "best understand" the very "pecu- 
liar" thing, must next be ascertained. No non-slaveholding 
Lexicographer (more than a non-slaveholding President) is 
to be trusted, here. A Yankee Dictionary may best define 
the meaning of the word " person." We must look further 
South for a full and clear definition of the word " slave." — 



*Thfe extraordinary syntax of the clause is noticed by Alvan Stewart, Esq. 
in his rble argument, (vide " Liberly Fiess," June 4, JM4J 



CHAP. II. — STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 23 

The claimant has a witness in Court. Having come to 
claim a slave, he has brought with him the slave code of 
the State from which the slave has "escaped" in order to 
inform the Court, precisely, what it is — "under the laws 
thereof" that is claimed. The Court directs the witness to 
be sworn. He is " a southern man with southern princi- 
ples." In every thing relating to the " peculiar institution" 
he is erudite, authoritative, and "sound to the core." And 
moreover, though a southern man, he is a " while man " and 
without a tinge of African blood: — a competent witness of 
course. He must be heard with "peculiar" respect. The 
Sheriff and Constables will preserve "silence in Court," 
while he testifies — Hush! 

"Slaves shall be deemed, sold, taken, reputed, anil adjudged in law, to 
be CHATTELS PERbONAL, in the hands of their owners and posses- 
sors, and their executors, administrators and assigns, to all intents, con- 
structions and purposes whatsoever.— Law of South Carolina. 2 Brtv. Dig, 
229; Princes Digest, 446, #c 

"Incase the personal property of a ward shall consist of specific AR- 
TICLES, such as slaves, working beasts, animals of any kind, stock, fur- 
niture, plates, books, and so forth, * * * * the Court may at any time, 
pas? an order for the sale thereof."— Act of Maryland, 1798, Chap. ci. ijc. 

••.Slaves shall always be considered and reputed real estate-"— Louisiana, 
Act of January, 1806. 

»« In Kentucky by the law of descents, they are considered real estate," 
but "are liable AS CHATTELS, to be sold by the master, at his pleasure, 
and may be taken in execution for the payment of his debts." — 2 Litt.and 
Sni. Digest. 

" The cardinal principle of slavery, that the slave is NOT to be ranked 
among sentient beings, but among THINGS, as an article of property, a 
chattel personal, obtains as undoubted law, in all of these States."— 
Stroud, page 23.- . 

" It is plain that the dominion of the master is as unlimited as that 
which is tolerated by the laws of any civilzed country, in relation to 
brute animals, to quadrupeds, to use the words of the civil law."— Stroud, 
page 24. 

" Slaves can make no contract''— "A slave can not even contract matri- 
mony."— Stroud, page 61. 

"Two hundred years have sanctified negro slaves as property"—' That 
is property which the law makes property"— "The moment the incon- 
testible fact is admitted that negro slaves are property, the law of movea- 
ble property attaches itself to them, and secures the right of carrying them 
from one State to another, where they are recognized as property."— 
Speech of Henry Clay in the United States Senate, February 7, 1839. 

"The undersigned feels assured that it will be only necessary to refer 
Lord Palmerston to the provisions of the Constitution of the United 
States, and the laws of many of the States, to satisfy him of the existence 
of slavery, and that slaves are there regarded and protected as property, 
that bv these laws there is in fact no distinction in principle between pro. 
ptrty in persons and property in things; and that the Government has more 
than once in the most solemn manner determined that slaves killed in the ser- 
vice of the United States, even in a state of war, were to be regarded as 
property, and not as persons ; and the Government held reponsible for 
their value."— Mr. Stevenson to Lord Palmerston. 

This testimony too, is taken down by the Court, and 
"strict construction" wipes its spectacles for the compar- 
ison. How reads the record ? " We b*ve it in evidence 
that the --novo. '• pawn'' denotes a human being, a man, wo- 



i 



24 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

man, or child, considered as opposed to THINGS, and dis- 
tinct from them. We have it in evidence, likewise, that the 
word ' slave* means a chattel personal, A THING, and not a 
sentient being. The testimony, then, is, that a ' person' can 
not be a thing ; and that a *• slave 1 is a thing. The word 
' person' in the Constitution, therefore, can not mean a slave. 
The claimant, by proving the being claimed, under this 
clause, to be a slave, has proved that he is not a person, and 
therefore can not be recovered under this clause." So 
reasons " strict construction" and prepares to render judg- 
ment, without further waste of time. By joint request of 
both the parties, the Court consents, however,. to a consid- 
eration of other matters, before pronouncing a decision. 

Waiving the syntactical suicide of the clause under re- 
view, and passing from the definition of the words " person" 
and " slave," we take up the clause again, and read it over 
carefully, to discover, if we can, what impression it conveys, 
as a w-hole, of the condition of the being or " person" it de- 
scribes. And the result is, first, that the condition of a slave 
is not therein described ; second, that a certain condition, 
familiarly known among us, is described ; and third, that 
the condition thus described, is the condition of one who by 
the description, can not possibly be, or could not have been a 
slave. 

First : — The condition of the slave is not described at ail, 
in the clause. The appropriate English word, slave, univer- 
sally used, especially in this country, to express that condi- 
tion, is carefully excluded! How is this, if the design was 
to specify and to describe that " peculiar" condition ? The 
phrase " held to service of labor" does not describe the 
legal condition of the slave. He is held as " property,'' 
goods and chattels personal;'''' but the law knows nothing, 
and has nothing to say or to prescribe, concerning his ser- 
vice or uselessness, concerning his labor or his idleness. 
The highest prized slaves, those commanding incomparably 
the largest sums of money in the market, are * held," 
bought and sold for other purposes than labor, purposes 
altogether incompatible with it ! " Escaping" is an awkward 
word at best, to be applied to property, to a chattel, to a 
thing. Self locomotive property may be described as 
11 straying," but not as " escaping" from its owner. " Dis- 
charged from service or labor" is a phrase never used to 
describe either the manumission of a slave, or his release 
from labor. The phrase supposes a legal obligation to labor 
which can not rest on the slave. The law requires no labor 
of him, whatever his master may do. There are sometimes 



CHAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 25 

laws ostensibly limiting the amount of labor to be imposed 
upon siaves, as there are laws to prohibit the abusive treat- 
ment of cattle, but such laws never speak of their " rfif- 
charge" from any portion of their labor. If such laws should 
go so far as to forbid, in certain specific cases, the putting of 
any labor upon aged, decrepit, or diseased slaves, the prohi- 
bition would be no emancipation, n-jr would it be called a 
" discharge from labor." " On claim of the party to whom 
such service or labor may be due" — Nothing can be legally 
due from a slave to his master: from "goods and char 
personal" to their '* owners and possessors." w The si 
can make no contract," and hence, nothing can be v ' due" 
from him. Master and slave can not be creditor and debtor. 
The ou-ner has no legal " claim" upon his beast for labor. 
He can net " sue him at the law" for default of "service," 
nor can the law enforce the payment, or " discharge" from 
it. All such language is inapplicable to the condition of 
the slave. If the slave master has proved the estray "chattel" 
to be his chattel, his slave, then he has proved, not merely 
that he is no " person" but that nothing can be " due" from 
him, and that the clause of the Constitution now under re- 
view, does not apply to the case. If this clause of the Con- 
stitution "does apply to slaves, it ema?idpates than, for it 
proceeds upon the basis of self oicnership in the person held 
to labor, and makes its provisions applicable only to a debt- 
or in law, who, in order to owe the creditor, must own him- 
self."* And this appears from a consideration of the other 
points proposed. 

Second : — The clause does describe a condition, familiarly 
known among us : — the condition of "persons," as "distinct 
from things" — persons who are "held to service or labor 
under the laws of the State" wherein they reside — persons 
"from whom such service or labor may be due" because 
they may have contracted to perform it, or because due to 
parents or guardians ; persons whom the laws, on proper 
grounds, may "discharge" from the labor that may be wrong- 
fully demanded of them, persons who may wish to, "escape'' 
from the obligations believed to be resting on them, persons 
whom the authorities of one State may appropriately "deli- 
ver up on the claim of the party (in another State) to whom 
such service or labor may be due." Such is the condition 
of the apprentice, the minor, the contractor of job work, the 

* Tract No. 6, New England Anti-Slavery Tract Association, on "Persons 
held to Service, Fugitive Slaves," <fcc , by Theodore D. Weld. If the reader 
wishes to see the argument exemplified, which is here briefly condensed, chiefly 
from that work, he should read it entire. On the " ttrict conut ruction" princi- 
ple, its positions will not be easily overturned. 



< 






26 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

debtor, who is held to service or labor by the tenns of his 
own voluntary agreement.* 

Third: — The condition so accurately and minutely de- 
scribed in the clause, is a condition which can not, by any 
possibility, be predicable of the slave, who is held as pro- 
perty, who can make no contract, who can never become a 
creditor, and from whom nothing can be "due." 

Another feature of this clause has been noticed by an 
eminent lawyer, (S. P. Chase, Esq. of Ohio,) as inconsistent 
with the claim set up under it, of a right to demand fugitive 
slaves. The provision of the Constitution in this clause, is, 
that no person shall be discharged from service and iabor, 
in consequence of any law of the State into which he may have 
escaped. Now the fugitive slave is not discharged or libe- 
rated in consequence of any such law. He becomes free, the 
moment he leaves a slave State, in consequence of the fact 
that he " leaves the municipal laws of that State behind him. 
He is free by nature, and the endowment of the Creator. He 
is made a slave by law. The law which makes him a slave, 
can not follow him beyond the limits of its own territory. 
When he passes beyond those limits he resumes his free- 
dom, simply because he has got beyond the reach of the 
force which suppressed it." — [Vide Cincinnati Herald, Nov. 
6, 1844.] 

Should it be claimed, as perhaps it maybe, that in a dis- 
puted or doubtful case, the principle of "strict construction" 
does not preclude a reference to the history of the times, 
the general understanding, &c. &c, to gather light upon the 
meaning of a legal instrument, the answer is at hand. No 
references of the kind proposed, on the principle of '" strict 
construction 3 (for in that Court we are litigating now) "can 
avail to set aside the plain terms in which a clause of the 
Constitution is expressed." Aside from the faulty syntax 
of the clause first noticed, no terms could more plainly ex- 
press the condition of the "persons" specified and described ; 
a condition incompatible with that of the slave." ".Strict 
construction" will not permit the supposition that the Con- 
stitution means a slave, when its framers, whatever their 
intentions might be, took such special care not to say that 
they meant it, but actually said the contrary. " Strict con- 
struction" maintains that even if " a statute, or a clause of a 



* This view of the subject is moreover confirmed and additional force is given 
to the idea that the peculiar condition of the slave is not described in the clause, 
when we remember that no allusion is made to the color commonly supposed 
to be the badge of the slave, and of those that may be claimed as such. This 
remark can be neutralized only by pleading that the common construction of 
the clause, embodied in the Act of 1793, and in the decision of the Supreme 
rioiilt. doe* contemr.l^tp the enslavement of whtts '. 



CHAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 27 

constitution, may in certain cases, be construed beyond the 
letter," it " must never be construed against the letter." 
11 Strict construction" affirms that "a construction repugnant 
to the express words of the law can not hold — and further, 
that where the words are unambiguous and explicit, the 
construction must not only not conflict with it, but must be 
based vpon it, and still further, that Courts are not at liberty 
to carry out what they may suppose to be the design of the 
law, to put upon its provisions a construction repugnant to 
its words, even though the consequence of not doing it 
should be defeat to the object of the law." " Strict con- 
struction" holds that "with the policy of a clause in the Con- 
stitution, Judges have nothing to do." " Strict construction" 
rules that the Court has no authority " to presume the inten- 
tions of the framers, but to collect them from the words, 
taken in their ordinary import;" and "strict construction" 
cites the authorities that follow : 

" Lord Tenterton, the late distinguished Chief Justice of the Court of 
King's Bench, in a recent judgment, says :— ' Our decision may, perhaps, 
in this case, operate to defeat the object of the statute, but it is better to 
abide by this consequence than to put upon it a construction not warrant- 
ed by the act, in order to give effect to what we may suppose to be the 
intentions of the legislature. ' 

"So, in the case of ' Notley vs. Buck,' 8 B. and C. 164, (hat eminent 
Judge says: — 'The icords may probably go beyond the intent' „ - 
they do, "it rests with ihe legislature to make an alteration. The duty of 
the Court is only to construe and give effect to the provision.' " 

Imbedded in principles and precedents like these, what 
can " strict construction" do, but decide against the claim- 
ant of a fugitive slave, under the third clause of the second 
section of the fourth article of the Constitution of the United 
States? 

If it still be pleaded, in arrest of judgment, that " the 
clause is fairly open to two interpretations, and that there- 
fore resort must be had to history, to contemporaneous ex- 
position," &c. &c, the plea is inadmissible here, because 
it is in effect a motion to take the case out of the Court of 
11 strict construction" and try it at that other Court to which 
the claimant will be allowed an appeal, if defeated here. 
But inasmuch as other important questions touching the 
"peculiar institution" and its claims on other portions of 
the Constitution are about to be litigated in this Court, the 
judgment in this particular case will be suspended, for fur- 
ther deliberation. 






' 



28 american constitutional law. 

Apportionment of Representatives and Direct Taxes. 

"Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the 
several States which may be included within this Ijnion, according to 
their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the 
whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a 
term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other 
persons/' &c. — U. S. Const. Art. I. Sect. 2. Clause 3. 

And who, among the uninitiated, could have divined that 
either a " compromise" or a "guaranty" of slavery, was 
bound up in these w T ords ? Nothing is said about slavery or 
slaves. And since nothing is said, how can " strict construc- 
tion" admit the plea that something was intended ? And that 
that something was (what is not mentioned in the Constitu- 
tion) a " guaranty" or a " compromise" in its favor ? 

Allowing, one moment, for the sake of the argument, that 
the word "persons" did mean "slaves," and that the States 
holding few or no slaves consented to an arrangement by 
which three-fifths of the slaves were to be counted, in the 
apportionment of representatives and direct taxes — What 
then? How is the " compromise" or the "guaranty" of 
slavery made out ? "Strict construction" can infer nothing 
of the kind. It can only see a bargain about the payment 
of money, and the right to choose a given number of repre- 
sentatives — a barter trade, in which the Yankee States in- 
tended to benefit their pockets at the expense of a portion cf 
their political power — and got the worst of the bargain, as 
other Esaus have done before them. Further than this, 
"strict construction" could not go, granting all the premises 
claimed. 

But "strict construction" will never consent to the 
premises. It will by no means admit, that when the Con- 
stitution speaks of " persons" — of human beings, in distinc- 
tion from things, it means "goods and chattels personal, to 
all intents, constructions and purposes whatsoever," — of 
"things" in distinction from "sentient beings." We pass 
to another topic. 

"Migration or' Importation." 

" The migration or importation of such persons as any of the States 
now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by Con- 
gress, prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax 
or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars 
for each person."— V. S. Const. Art. I. Sect. 9, Clause 1. 

What " compromise" or " guaranty" of " the peculiar in- 
stitution" have we, here ? For the sake of the argument, 
we will, in the first place, suppose, that " the migration or 
importation of such persons," &c. means " the migration 
and importation of " slaves. What does " strict constrtjc- 



CHAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 29 

tion" see in this clause of the Constitution, then ? — 
It notices, 

1. That it applies only to the States " now existing" that 
is, when the Constitution was formed, adopted or put into 
actual operation. Kentucky, Tennessee, Louisiana, Alaba- 
ma, Mississippi, Arkansas, Missouri, a majority of the present 
slaveholding States, -as well as Florida, are not included, and 
never were, and never can be, in the provisions of this clause; 
and whatever of " compromise" or of " guaranty" the "pe- 
culiar institution" in the six other slave States may claim, 
or may have claimed, under it, the seven States above men- 
tioned never have had, and never can have, any part or lot 
in the matter. Congress may, at any time, do, in respect 
to those States and to this Territory whatever it might have 
done, had the clause never have been written. To them it 
brings neither " guaranty" or " compromise." It notices, 

2. That the year one thousand eight hundred and eight, 
having gone by, thirty-seven years ago, whatever of compro- 
mise" or of " guaranty" the clause may have given to some 
of the original States, for a time, the period of its operation 
has long since elapsed, and the present generation has no 
more to do with it, than with the edicts of Caesar Augustus.* 
It notices, 

3. That the clause, even when in force, in respect to the 
original States, did not, on the principle of " strict construc- 
tion" restrain Congress from "establishing justice" and 
H securing the blessings of liberty" by the general abolition 
of slavery. On that subject, the clause under consideration, 
had nothing to say, and accordingly said nothing. 

So that if it could be true that the word " petsons" here 
used, meant slaces, it could not be true on the principles of 
"strict construction" tnat the system of slavery derives any 
" guaranty" from it, or its existence " compromised" or per- 
mitted by it. 

But back of all this lies the self-evident truth that "per- 
sons" are human beings, with "souls" as well as bodies — 
and that consequently, they are not " chattels personal" and 
" thi?igs." The dictionaries tell us this. " Strict construc- 
tion" decides according to the meaning of the icords — and the 
word "persons" can not mean " slaves." " Strict construc- 

*If the claimant, by his own construction 3ud 'lis. uwn showing h af lid 
< ; bond" satisfied, to the very letter- if he has had his cake, and cat it up, a gene- 
ration ago, for what honest object does he come into Court, whining al out his 
'"bond" and •'guaranty" and ''compromise/' now? Was the ' "compromise" 
all on one side ? Is the twenty years' respite never to run out ? Constitutional 
expositors who urge "compromises" and "guaranties" after this fashion, must 
either be veiy dull of apprehension themselves, or presume largely on the stu- 
piditf ofi-others- 



i 






30 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

tion" accordingly reads this clause as applicable to the in- 
gress or egress of "human beings with natural rights" — u a 
man, woman, or child, considered as opposed to things or 
distinct from them." These may be English, French, 
Dutch, Irish, Malay, Hottentot, Hindoo, or African. But 
they can not be slaves. 

Before dismissing this topic, it may be worth while to 
notice a remarkable inconsistency of those who hold the op- 
posite doctrine. If it be true, as they insist, that the mi- 
gration and importation of slaves is described in this clause, 
and that prior to the year 1808, Congress had no power to 
prohibit their ingress, by migration or importation, into " any 
of the States," &c, that should " think proper to admit" 
them — then it follows that the famous law of 1793, for the 
seizure and return of fugitive slaves, migrating into States 
willing to receive them, was palpably unconstitutional and 
premature.* Not less so. I may add, upon the construction 
that makes " persons" to mean human beings, in distinction 
from things, from chattels, and slaves. 

Suppression of Insurrection. 

"Congress shall have power" "to provide for calling forth the mili- 
tia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel in- 
vasions." — United States Constitution, Article I, Section 8, Clause 14. 

It is claimed that by this clause, the National Govern- 
ment is bound to assist in quelling an outbreak of refracto- 
ry slaves, whenever they may refuse to work, or whenever 
they may forcibly resist their masters. 

What says a "strict construction' 1 '' of the Constitution to 
this claim ? 

"Congress shall have power to" do a specific thing. Does 
that mean that Congress shall do that specific thing ? Or 
does it only mean that Congress shall act according to its 
discretion, in the matter ? 

11 Congress shall have power''' (under this same section) 
"to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts" — "to borrow 
money on the credit of the United States" — " to establish 
uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the 
United States"—" to declare war, grant, letters of marque 
and reprisal" — " to raise and support armies" — " to provide 
for, and maintain a navy," &c. &c. &c. Does this language 
mean that Congress shall do all or any of the things speci- 
fied ? Or that it shall do this on demand of any particular 
portion of the country, irrespective of its own best judgment 

*See address ot Alvan Stewart, Esq. And here we hate another illustration 
of the fidelity and acumen with which the Constitution has been expound- 
ed, hitherto, by its official guardians ! 






CHAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 31 

of the "justice" of the measure, and the interests of the 
country at large? To ask questions like these, is to answer 
them. 

14 To execute the laws of the JJnion." But do " the laws 
of the Union" enforce the labor of slaves, or legalize the 
power of the masters ? By what clause of the Constitution 
are such powers conferred ? 

" To suppress insurrections and repel invasions." And 
what is an insurrection? " Strict construction" inquires, at 
every step, into the meaning of the words, (in their ordinary 
import) which the Constitution employs. We must call 
Noah Webster again, to the stand. 

" Insurrection. — A rising against civil or political authority ; the open 
and active opposition of a number of persons to the execution of law, in a 
City or State. It is equivalent to sedition, except that sedition expresses 
a less extensive rising of citizens. It differs from rebellion, for the latter 
expresses a revolt, or attempt to overthrow the government, to establish 
a different one, or to place the country under another jurisdiction. It 
differs from mutiny, as it respects the civil or political government, whereas 
a mutiny is open opposition to law in the army or navy."— Webster's Dic- 
tionary. 

An " Insurgent :" — Is " A PERSON who rises in opposition to civil or 
political authority ; one who openly and actively resists the execution of 
laws. An insurgent differs from a rebel. Theinsurgent opposes the exe- 
cution of a particular law or laws, the rebel attempts to overthrow or 
change the government, or he revolts, and attempts to place the country 
under another jurisdiction. All rebels are insurgents, but all insurgents 
are not rebels." — lb. 

Admitting, for the sake of the argument (what is not true) 
that a slave can be a " person" in the eye of the law, it is 
evident that the refusal of a slave to obey his overseer or 
owner — and that his forcible resistance to their persons or 
to their authority can not amount to an insurrection — does 
not constitute him an insurgent. The authority of the mas- 
ter over the slave is neither "civil" nor "political authority" 
The slaveholder is not, by virtue of his slaveholding, a legis- 
lator or a magistrate. Neither the Constitution of the United 
States nor that of any one of the slave States, directly con- 
fers legislative or executive power upun the individual slave- 
holder, as such. When a slave refuses to obey a command 
of his master, he does not refuse to obey a law, either of the 
State or the Nation. When he resists the enforcement of 
his master's demand, such resistance is not " opposition to 
the execution of law." If a thousand or a million of slaves 
should do the same thing, at the same time, it would not 
alter the nature of the act. In doing it, they would resist 
only their masters. They would not resist " the execution 
of law" — they would not rise against "civil or political au- 
thority." And consequently they would be guilty of no 
insurrection. The masters, in such a case, might bring their 



* 



• 



32 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

several actions against the slaves at Justice's Courts, for 
" assault and battery," if the slaves could be accounted in 
law, " persons.'''' But since this is not the case, the thing is 
never done.* 

It is often claimed, on behalf of the " domestic institution 
of slavery," that it is part and parcel of the family relation, 
or at any rate, so nearly resembles it, that it may be judged 
of by the same rules. The slave is compared with the hired 
servant, the apprentice, the minor child, and- sometimes, 
even with the wife. And the authority of the slaveholder 
and overseer is called "paternal" and is represented as sim- 
ilar to the authority of the " boss" workman, the employer, 
the master of the apprentice, the guardian, the parent, the 
husband. 

Let this clause of the Constitution be read in the light of 
such representations. Here are hired servants that decline 
to do the bidding of their employers. Here are bound ap- 
prentices that will neither make shoes, nor tan leather, nor 
ply the needle, nor wield the broad-axe, nor swing the 
sledge-hammer. Here are minor children that throw down 
their hoes in the corn field, or their scythes in the meadow. 
Here ate house-wives that demur against the drudgeries of 
M domestic"-cookery, that will neither bake or boil pot, will 
neither churn, wash, nor iron ; at least without the stipulated 
compensation of new gowns, caps, and ribbons, beyond the 
convenience or good pleasure of their husbands. High 
words ensue, and words ripen into blows. The contagion 
spreads from family to family, from village to village, from 
State to State — confusion reigns, industry is paralyzed, 
broom-sticks are brandished, and broken ribs and bloody 
noses complete the scene. Now for the remedy. " Con- 
gress shall have power, to provide for calling forth the mili. 
tia to execute the laics of the Union, suppress insurrectiojis, 
and repel invasions /" 

If irony be detected in the picture, it is only because 
there was absurdity in the thing that presented itself for the 
portrait. 

On the principle of " strict construction" this clause of 
the Constitution, so far from making it obligatory on Con- 
gress to employ the military force of the Nation to enforce 
the labor of slaves, or to interfere in the "domestic" quar- 



*1 do not forget that the enactments of the slave States provide for the put.- 
ishmeut of the slaves as criminals, tfut I contend thai those enactment- are 
in Hit contradiction of the code that holds them as goods and chattels j.ersonal. 
If the one is valid law, the other can not be, and any impartial Court would so 
decide. The moment a slave is legally indicted for crime, that moment he is 
legally declared a person, and not a chattel ; in other words he is legally 
emancipated. 



chap. ii. — Strict construction. 33 

rels of servants and their masters by " calling forth the mi- 
litia," does not even invest Congress with the poioer to do any 
such thing. 

Those who hold the opposite doctrine, are nevertheless 
wont to proclaim loudly, the very limited authority of the 
Federal Government, its incompetency to intermeddle with 
local concerns ; and they magnify greatly the untouched 
independency, and reserved powers of the separ.itc States. 
All this is urged, in special reference to the existence of 
slavery. But in this very " peculiar domestic" concern of 
keeping the slaves quiet, their theory is reversed ! The 
Federal power is every thing, and State power is unable to 
punish murder, nay, even to restrain assault and battery, 
without the national arm. A kitchen quarrel between maid 
and mistress, an altercation between a slave-driver and his 
gang, a street brawl, blows between a night-walker and a 
patrol, a chase after a runaway chambermaid or ostler, at- 
tendance on a religious meeting after nine o'clock or after 
sunset, or by Sabbath sunlight, without a written pass ; the 
preaching of a sable colored laborer to his fellows, the keep- 
ing of a school to teach the alphabet, the unseasonable visit 
of a lover to his mistress, of a husband to his wife, or of a 
mother to her offspring ; the refusal to labor without wages, 
or to do the unlawful bidding of the debauchee or the drunk- 
ard — all these, or either one of them, are gravely held, by 
constitutional lawyers, to be fit occasions for calling out the 
national militia — all these, or either one of them, if persist- 
ed in, and by a sufficient number of persons to embarrass or 
endanger the slaveholders, are held to be equivalent to an 
insurrection ! 

Let it be noted that the power of Congress to suppress 
" insurrection" carries along with it, the power of Congress 
to. define "insurrection" — to say in what an insurrection 
consists, and in what it does not consist. And " strict con- 
struction'' insists that Congress shall frame this definition 
in accordance with the "ordinary import of the words" — in 
accordance with the testimony of the accredited lexicogra- 
phers of the language. And where shall we find better 
authority than that of Noah Webster? Or a respectable 
definition at variance with the one quoted from him ? 

And when Congress shall have defined the word " insur- 
rection" in direct reference to proposed action in the case of 
refractory slaves, it will have dipped pretty deeply into the 
V delicate question" of the legality of American Slavery ! 

Before dismissing entirely the definition of the word 
3 



< 



► 



34 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

11 insurrection," employed in the Constitution, it may be 
well to see how nearly we can approximate towards the dis- 
covery of a definition furnished by the Constitution itself. 
The Constitution is particular, in its definition of the word 
" treason" and Noah Webster may help us to compare the 
words "treason" and "insurrection" 

44 Treason against the United State3 shall consist only in levying war 
against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and com- 
fort. No person shall be convicted of treason, unless on the testimony of 
two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open Court." — 
United States Constitution, Article III, Section 3, Clause 1. 

44 Treason, is the highest crime, of a civil nature, of which a man can be 
guilty. In general, it is the offence of attempting to overthrow the go- 
vernment of the State to which the offender owes allegiance, or, of be- 
traying the State into the hands of a foreign power." — Webster's Diction- 
ary. 

If there be a difference between the Dictionary and the 
Constitution, it lies in this; that the Constitution limits the 
11 general" meaning of the Dictionary, and restricts it to the 
particular overt acts specified — levying war — adheiing to 
enemies; — whereas the more ''general" definition might 
include other acts of the same nature and design. By the 
same rule, a constitutional definition of " insurrection" — if a 
definition had been furnished, would have restricted rather 
than enlarged, the definition of the Dictionary, confining 
11 insurrection" to the specific act of bearing arms against 
the civil or political authority, and the execution of the laws. 

The difference pointed out by Webster between insurrec- 
tion and rebellion, is substantially the same as is noticed in 
comparing his definitions of " insurrection" and of " treason." 
Insurrection is the less comprehensive act. It may consist 
in an armed resistance against the execution of a particular 
law of the State, without directly attempting the more com- 
prehensive enterprise of overturning the Slate itself, and 
establishing another government over it. 

The nearest literal adhesi-m to the words of the Consti- 
tution that the case admits of, conducts us, therefore, to the 
same definition (substantially) of the word insurrection^ that 
is furnished by Webster, only more carefully restricted, less 
liable to be extended to a variety of indefinite acts. 

In no view we can take, will "strict construction" permit 
us to apply the clause of the Constitution now under review, 
to the case of refractory slaves : — not even if slaves were to 
be considered and dealt with, as "pcisons." 

But this is not the case. — As slaves are "deemed, sold, 
taken, reputed and adjudged, in law, to be CHATTELS 
PERSONAL" — " to all intents, constructions and purposes 
whatsoever" — it is manifestly beyond the power of irony or 



CHAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 3-5 

satire to oyerpaint the picture of absurdity and ridiculous- 
ness, wrapped up in the claim, under this clause, of a con- 
stitutional pledge, guaranty, or even authority or warrant, 
for the employment of the national militia to keep the slaves 
in subjection, to enforce their labor, or to protect their own- 
ers against them, 

" That is property which the law makes property." And 
" Congress*shall have power" to "suppress insurrections" of 
" property" against its owners ! — or " against the execution 
of law !" " Specific articles, such as slaves, working beasts, 
animals of any kind" decline performing the tasks their 
owners desire of them. They frisk out of their traces, run 
back, refuse to draw, throw up their heels; they crush the 
feet of their Balaam-eyed riders against a wall, they crouch, 
lie down and refuse to rise again. And behold ! — " Con- 
gress shall have power to" provide for the emergency by 
"calling forth the militia, to execute the laws of the Union .'" 
" Specific articles" of property, in conspiracy with " Real 
Estate," aspire to become owners of " specific articles" and 
holders of "real estate" themselves. " Goods and Chattels" 
demur against being held as ooods and chattels any longer, 
desirous of possessing " goods and chattels" in their turn. 
Constitutional Law, putting on its wig, and mounting its 
woolsack, decides it to be a manifest case of " insurrection" 
against the State ! The contest between " Goods and Chat- 
tels" and their " owners and possessors" waxes warm and 
comes to blows. " Goods and Chattels" are likely to be- 
come an over-match for their owners. " Working animals" 
meditate deeds of blood and slaughter among their posses- 
sors. Horns and heels are already bringing muskets and 
cutlasses into requisition. "Congress shall have power" to 
protect their owners against their property — to "suppress 
insurrections and repel invasions /" To wage a warof exter- 
mination against " Goods and Chattels" and " Real Estate" 
for the benefit of their " owners and possessors, and their 
heirs, executors, administrators and assigns!" Such is a 
specimen of the jargon resulting from the construction of 
the Constitution against which we contend. 

Protection against Domestic Violence. 

But another section of the Constitution, or rather a muti- 
lated fragment of it, is quoted to the same effect. The en- 
tire section reads thus : 

"The United States shall guaranty to every State in the Union, a re- 
publican form of government and shall protect each of them from inva- 
sion ; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive, (when 
the legislature can not be convened,) against domestic violence." 



1 



86 



AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 



The first part of this section will receive particular atten- 
tion, in another place. The provision looks in quite another 
direction than the federal guaranty of slavery ; a circum- 
stance sufficiently obvious to every one ; and accordingly 
we never find it quoted in its proper connection, or quoted 
at all, by those who plead the constitutional compromises 
and guaranties we are now considering. 

The United States shall, in certain contingencies specifi- 
ed, protect each of the States from invasion, and from do- 
mestic violence. Whatis the " domestic violence" intended ? 
The connection leads us to conceive of that violence as natu- 
rally resulting from attempts to subvert "a republican form 
of government" and establish other usages in their stead. 
At all events, it is evident that the section must not be 
construed into a right or obligation, on the part of the United 
States, to lend its aid and authority to the support of anti- 
republican laws and usages in the States. For that would 
be to quote the provision in opposition to its own express 
terms. And consequently the provision can not be constru- 
ed as authorizing or requiring the United States to assist in 
supporting slavery in any of the States, for slavery is known 
to be the most anli- republican thing that can be conceived. 
Slavery and republicanism are opposites, and the common 
use of language places the terms in opposition to each other. 
And "strict construction" never permits a depaiture from 
the plain meaning of the words. 

This view is further confirmed by a consideration of the 
ordinary use and proper meaning of the terms "domestic 
violence." 

"Domestic. Belonging to the house or home; pertaining to one's 
place of residence and to the family. ****** Pertaining to 
a nation, considered as a family, or to one's own country ; intestine, and 
not foreign." — Webster's Dictionary. 

fl Violence. 1. Physical force, strength of action or motion. 2. Moral 
force; vehemence. 3. Outrage, unjust force, crimes of all kinds. 4. Ea- 
gerness, vehemence. 5. Injury, infringement. 6. Injury, hurt. 7. Rav- 
ishment, rape. To do violence to, or on ; to attack, to murder. To do 
violence to, to outrage, to force, to injure."— lb. 

"Domestic violence" therefore in the bad senses of the 
word violence, (which the Constitution evidently intended,) 
expresses nothing like the refusal of a slave to. labor, or his 
demanding, asserting or even defending his natural and in- 
alienable rights — his resisting the outrages and aggressions 
of others, upon those rights. On the other hand, the defini- 
tion of "domestic violence" does very accurately describe 
the forcible chattel enslavement of men, women and chil- 
dren ; the treatment that slaves inevitably receive, under 
the slave system, the outrages, injuries, and crimes, notori- 



CHAP. II. — STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 37 

ously and constantly perpetrated upon them ; and especially 
and emphatically does it describe the systematic, scourging, 
confinement, fettering, hunting with blood-hounds, shooting, 
down with rifles by individuals, and by volunteer bands of 
unauthorized and armed men, of fugitive or refractory labor- 
ers — thus filling the "house, the home, the place of resi- 
dence" — "the nation considered as a family" — "one's own 
country" with the worst species of " violence" — with " intes- 
tine" disorder and commotion. The graphic descriptions 
of Mr. Jefferson correspond with these observations. He 
speaks of slavery as an act of violence when he affirms that 
the liberties of "the enslaved " are not to be VIOLATED, 
but with the Divine wrath" — and he characterizes this vio- 
lence as a " DOMESTIC" violence, in both the senses we 
have quoted from Webster. "The parent storms, the child 
looks on, catches the lineaments of wrath, puts on the same 
airs, in the circle of smaller slaves, gives loose to the worst 
of passions, and thus nursed, educated, and daily trained in 
tyranny, can not but be stamped by it with odious peculiari- 
ties." Thus the " house, the home, the place of residence" 
is filled with " domestic violence." And not only so — "the 
nation considered as a family," our "own country" accord- 
ing to Mr. Jefferson, is filled with the same domestic violence. 
" With what execration should the statesman be loaded, 
who, permitting one-half the citizens to trample on the 
rights of the other, transforms those into despots, and these 
into enemies, destroys the morals of the one part, and the 
amor patriot of the other." 

No other "doinestic violence" in this country, can bear a 
comparison wi'.h slavery. " Strict construction' will never 
consent that the Constitution shall be understood to sanction 
the national enforcement of "DOMESTIC SLAVERY" 
under plea of protection, against "DOMESTIC VIO- 
LENCE !" 

Further than this, we insist not, at present. In another 
place we shall inquire whether the Constitution does not 
require the suppression, hy the United States, of this "do- 
mestic violence." 

Reserved Rights of the States. 

The right of the States to tolerate and sustain slavery is 
not unfrequently grounded on the reserved rights of the 
States, in conformity with the Constitution of the United 
States; viz : 

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, 
nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, 
ot to the people." -Amendments, Article 10. 



38 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

" The powers" — What powers ? All possible and impos- 
sible, conceivable and inconceivable powers? — The power 
to moke black white, and white black? — to reduce immor- 
tal souls tochattels? — to transform lawlessness into law? to 
construct a rectangular triangle whose three angles shall 
not be equal to two right angles ? 

To hear some men talk about the "reserved rights of the 
States" one would think that those rights included the right 
of omipotence ; or rather, the right to do what omnipotence 
itself can not do. 

11 Are reserved." Notice the words. u Reserved ," not origi- 
nated : — " Reserved" not "guarantied." 

" Strict construction" will insist upon a rigid adherence 

to the rvords, in their obvious and customary meaning, as 

applicable to the matter in hand. 

"Power." " The right of governing, or actual government-** — "legal 
authority, warrant" — "right, privilege." — Webster's dictionary. 

The " reserved RIGHTS of the States" can not include 
reserved WRONGS ! — The powers " reserved to the-States 
or to the people" are rightful powers — rightful authority. 

It is not provided, nor affirmed, in this article of amend- 
ments to the Constitution that the States or the people may 
do, whatever the Congress and the United States may not 
do ! There are many, very many things, that neither people, 
States, Congress, nor United States, may lawfully, or con- 
stitutionally do. As for example, neither People, nor State 
Governments, nor Congress, nor United States, may lawfully 
or constitutionally, select every tenth man in a township, or 
tenth man in a hundred, throughout the. country, and confis- 
cate their property, 'pro bono publico, and then colonize them 
to Liberia, to " get rid of them." They may not string up 
to the yard arm, every Irish emigrant that reaches the 
country, because he is not a "Native American." They 
may not seize upon Joseph Story, or Henry Clay, or Martin 
Van Buren, and drag them to unpaid labor in the rice 
swamps of Carolina, without jury trial, without charge of a 
crime. They may not seize upon every man with a hair lip 
or with red hair, or with black skin and crisped hair, and do 
the same thing with them. Nor may they suffer it lo be done 
by others. And though it should be proved that among "the 
powers delegated to the United States by the Constitution," 
and "prohibited by it to the States" no mention whatever is 
made of the power or authority to do or not to do the things 
that have been described — it would not follow from the 10th 
article of Amendments to the Constitution, that either "the 
•S'rUesor the People" have a right to perpetrate or to tolerate 



CHAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 39 

such crimes. It would not follow that their participancy in, 
or toleration, or legislative sanction of such crimes was con- 
stitutional. It would not follow that Congress, and the 
United States possess no rightful and constitutional authority 
to suppress such criminal practices. Thus far, at least, a 
M strict construction" of the article by the proper meaning of 
the words may conduct us. But this is not all. 

It is not to be taken for granted, without scrutiny, (as is 
commonly done) that the power of abolishing slavery is not 
delegated to the United States, by the Constitution. Nor is 
it to be thus taken for granted that the practice and legisla- 
tive sanction of slavery is not, by the National Constitution, 
prohibited to the States. If the opposite of the commonly 
received doctrine, on these points, should be found true, the 
tenth article of the amendments to the Constitution of the 
United States will, itself, have to be " reserved to the S'.ates 
respectively, or to the People" for. some worthier, some 
more dignified and republican use than that of attesting the 
constitutional right of baby stealing, and woman whipping, 
and selling boys and girls at auction, along with tallow 
candles, by the pound ! 

SECTION II. 
THE CLAIMS OF LIBERTY. 

The Preamble— Union, justice, domestic tranquility, common defence, 
general welfare, liberty— Powers of Congress— Power over commerce— 
A " Republican form of Government," (definitions of a republic by va- 
rious authorities)— Security of liberty, " due process of law'-— Slavery 
in the Territories and Federal District— The Constitution and the District 
of Columbia— Restrictions on State power— Inhibition of bills of attain, 
der, laws impairing the obligation of contracts, titles of nobility, (aris- 
tocracies, feudalism) making war, troops in time of peace— Immunities 
of citizens in each State— The summing up— Shylock and his pound of 
flesh— The Conclusion. 

Having patiently examined those portions of the Constitu- 
tion that are claimed in support of slavery, we may now be 
permitted to inquire what portions of the document, if any, 
may be regarded as friendly to liberty. It will be remem- 
bered that°we are still litigating our cause in the Court of 
" strict construction " — where a final disposal of the 
claims of slavery upon the Constitution is deferred, until the 
claims of liberty can be first examined. At the Court of 
11 strict construction" it is a well understood axiom that a 
document in favor of slavery ean not be in favor of liberty; 
and that a document in favor *of liberty can not be in favor 



40 AHERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

of slavery : that to establish the one claim is to overthrow the 
other. " Strict construction" studies, and sticks to the dic- 
tionary ; it goes by the meaning of the words, and hence the 
axiom that has been quoted, since the words " liberty" and 
" slavery" are opposite terms. 

The Preamble. 

M We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect 
union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the 
common defence, promote the general xcclfare, ami secure the blessings of 
LIBERTY to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this 
Constitution for the United States of America." 

"Strict construction" always holds the object and design 
of a decent and respectable document to be what it declares 
itself to be. At least it does this, until it can be proved, by 
the laws of " strict construction" to declare anuntruth, and 
then it no longer remains respectable or trustworthy. No- 
thing further need or can be done with it in that case, but 
to proclaim its true character! While the Constitution of 
1787-9 claims either respect or authority, it must be constru- 
ed to mean and intend what it says it means and intends. 

And what does it say it means and intends ? What mean- 
ing and intent do the words it employs, (in their natural and 
ordinary acceptation,) convey? The Constitution says h 
means the following things: — 

1. " To form a more perfect univi.'* Then it does not 
mean to "permit one-half the citizens lo trample on the 
rights of the other — to transform those into despots, and 
these into enemies" — as is done by slavery. 

2. " To establish justice." Then it does not mean to 
" guaranty" or tolerate injustice. It means to abolish and 
overthrow it, and there can be no greater injustice than 

slavery. 

3. " To ensure domtstic tranquility.'" Then it does net 
mean to guaranty or permit " domestic violence." It means 
to forbid and jes train it. There is no "domestic violence" 
equal to slavery. And nothing like slavery conflicts with 
"domestic tranquility." 

4. " To provide for the common defence." Then it docs 
not mean to permit a common warfare upon the defenceless. 
It does not mean to defend the aggressois. It does not mean 
to make " compromise" with a system that renders a "com- 
mon defence" against foreign invasion impracticable, br 
"destroying the^morals of the one part, and the amor patrios 
of the other." It means of course to abolish slavery, since, 
by no other method, can the " common defence" be provid- 
ed for, or made possible. 



CHAP. II. — STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 41 

5. "To promote the general welfare." Then it can not 
mean to promote or "guaranty" the known and admitted 
enemij of the " general welfare" — slavery. It can not mean 
to lend its aid in crushing the laboring, the producing class, 
in half the States of the Republic ; as it would do, if it make 
a compromise with slavery. 

6. "To secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves, and 
our posterity." Then it means to overthrow the deadly an- 
tagonist of liberty, to wit, slavery. 

These results are as certain as it is that the meaning or 
intent of any document is to be ascertained by its own ample, 
clear, express, unambiguous, and distinct language. In other 
words, they are as certain as it is that "strict construction" 
or any other sort of construction, can determine the meaning 
of the Constitution. " Strict construction" must pronounce 
judgment in favor of liberty and against slavery, or decide 
that the Court has no jurisdiction — that "strict construction" 
has no right to a seat on the wool-sack. 

Powers of Congress. 

But has the Constitution clothed Congress with the au- 
thority and poiver to carry into execution the meaning and 
intent of the Constitution itself? Let us see. 

" The Congress shall have power"— " to make all laics which shall be 
necessary and proper, for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, 
am! all other powers, vested by this Constitution in the Government of the 
United States, or in any department or officer thereof." — Art. I, Sect. 8, 
Clause 17. 

And so the Constitution itself gives an explicit and direct 
affirmative answer, to the question. " Strict construction" 
has nothing to do but to record and re-echo it. 

But suppose the legislation of Congress in accordance with 
the Constitution of the United States, should conflict with 
Slate legislation, the question may be asked — " Could such 
Slate legislation, in that case, be legally and constitutionally 
set aside, as null and void? Could the Federal Courts so 
decide, and render such State legislation of non-effect ? 
And must the State authorities acquiesce?" There is a pro- 
vision in the Constitution containing a direct and explicit 
answer to this question likewise. 

" This Constitution and the laws of the United States which shall be 
made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties which shall be made under the 
authority of the United States, shall be THE SUPREME LAW OF 
THE LAND, and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby. ANY 
THING in the CONSTITUTION or LAWS OF ANY STATE TO THE 
CONTRARY NOTWITHSTANDING." 

Whatever, therefore, in the action of any of the States, 
conflicts with the Constitution of the United States ; what- 



42 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

ever conflicts with the laws of Congress, made in accordance 
with, and "in pursuance" of, the grand objects of that Con- 
stitution, is unconstitutional, illegal, null, and void. It can 
not have the authority of law. 

Just as certain, therefore, as it is that the Constitution of 
the United States was " ordained" to " establish JUSTICE" 
" and SECURE the blessings of LIBERTY to ourselves and 
our POSTERITY"— just as certain as it is that the slave 
codes and enactments of the slave States establish injustice, 
and render the liberties of ourselves and our posterity inse- 
cure — just so certain as it is that the Constitution has con- 
ferred on Congress " power to make all laws which shall be 
necessary and proper for carrying into execution" the ex- 
press and declared objects of the Constitution itself ; just so 
certain is it (on the principles of " strict construction") that 
a law of Congress, abolishing slavery in the States where it 
exists, would be the " Supreme law of the land" and the 
judges "in every State" would "be bound thereby, any 
thing in the Constitution or laws of any Slate to the contra- 
ry notwithstanding." The plain, direct and express words 
of the Constitution of the United States, literally taken, say 
precisely this thing; and there is no escape from it, without 
appealing FROM the words of the "Constitution to the sup- 
posed intentions of the framers — and this is exactly what 
"strict construction" can not permit. 

But this, it may be said, is all " in the general" And 
some persons appear unable to distinguish between general- 
ities and nonentities. Their vision is microscopic. The 
more ample the dimensions of the object, the less capable 
they are of perceiving it. Had the Constitution specified 
some very minute matter in which either " union," " jus- 
tice," " domestic tranquility," the " common defence," " the 
general welfare," or " the blessingsof liberty," were involv- 
ed, the meaning would have been palpable enough. Per- 
haps even as large an object as chattel slavery itself, might 
have been seen, had it but been singled out and separated 
from all similar things, of the same class, and called by its 
technical name. (Such men can not see that slavery is for- 
bidden in the Bible, though they understand that extortion, 
and using service xoithout ivagcs are there forbidden !) But 
Const it utions are not commonly adapted or intended to be 
substitutes for the statute book. And because the Constitu- 
tion employs terms which describe and include slavery along 
with similar usages, it is difficult to make these persons see 
that it describes or means any thing at all! Their " strict 
construction" would be equivalent to no construction, since 



CHAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 43 

they allow nothing to be contained in the document, that is 
not expressed by a technical term. 'Twere well nigh use- 
less to reason with such. From generalities \\q will pass to 
such particulars as we maybe able to glean. 

Power over Commerce. 

" The Congress shall have power" "to regulate commerce with foreign 
nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes."— U. & 
Const. Art. I, Sect. 8, Clause 3. 

Slaves in law, are " goods and chattels personal." As 
such they are articles of commerce. And it is held and 
pleaded by the slaveholder that, "that is property which Me 
lata declares to be property." The whole question, then, of 
the chattelhood and commerce in slaves, is in the hands of the 
law making power, wherever that power is lodged. ISobody 
pretends that slaves could be held and <old as property with- 
out specific enactment of the legislative authorities. The 
right to hold and sell slaves as chattels is not claimed to be 
a natural, original, and inherent right. It rests solely on 
the statute. 

Well, then, the Constitution of the United States as above 
quoted, provides that this whole power " to regulate com- 
merce" 10 " declare what is property," and what is not pro- 
perty, to say what shall be or shall not be bought and sold, 
and if so, under what restrictions, is vested in the Congress 
of the United States, and being thus vested, it is denied to 
the legislatures of the several States, 50 far forth, as " com- 
merce with foreign nations, and among the several States, 
and with the Indian tribes," is concerned. In all this field 
of commerce, " that is property which the law" of Congress 
11 declares to be property" — if the commercial law maxims 
of the slave code are [0 be our guide — that is, If slaves are 
to be deemed chattels at all ! 

Thus far, in the Court of " strict construction," all is 
" plain sailing" enough. How all this is to operate, or what 
bearing it is to have upon the tenure upon which slave pro- 
perty is held in certain States of this Union, " strict construc- 
tion" has no occasion now to inquire. .A little interlocutory, 
lobby conversation, however, on this point, may be here in- 
dulged. 

[Jf Henry Clay has taken the right view of the subject 
(and it is not easy to see what other view any claimant of 
slave property can take) it is manifest that, inthe cxerciseof 
their constitutional power, under this clause, the Congress of 
the United Stales may strike a deep, if not a fatal blow at 
the very root of all slave property at the South. For, as an 



< 



44 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

argument against such congressional action, Mr. Clay insists 
that the chattelship of the slave can not he separa'ed from the 
right to carry him from State to State as an article of mer- 
chandise. The same principle wouldapply to the foreign 
slave- trade (though the immediate and direct practical op- 
eration of its abolition might be less serious,) that is to say, 
the power that was competent to the abolition of the slave- 
trade, domestic or foreign, was competent likewise to the 
abolition of slavery itself since both rested on the same basis, 
nnd the one was involved in the other, and depended nponil. 
On some such considerations, doubtless, was founded the 
general belief and assumption, at the time the present Con- 
stitution was adopted, that the abolition of the foreign slave- 
trade was to involve the abolition of slavery. The now as- 
certained impracticability of putting down the slave-trade, 
on the high seas, and in our own commercial cities, in the 
presence of slavery, is only another illu£tr«':1 :©E of Mr. Clay's 
doctrine that the right of slave chattelship and the right of 
carrying on the slave-trade me one and indivisible ! These 
are his words : — 

" The moment the incontestible fact is admitted that negro s'aves are 
property, the law of movable property attaches itself to them, and e-- 
cures the right of carrying them from one State to another, where they 
are recognized as properly." — Spccih in the Senate, February 7, 1839. 

In view of the constitutional provision now under consid- 
eration, as a data of reasoning, yet retaining Mr. Clay's 
identification of chattelship with commerce, we may para- 
phraze and improve his logical process on this wise. 

'The moment the incontestible fact is admitted, that 'he 
Congress of the United States are by express provision of 
the Constitution, clothed with the power of " regulating 
commerce among foreign nations, and among the several 
States, and with the Indian tribes" — that moment the con- 
stitutional power of control over slave property in the sev- 
eral States, attaches itself to the Congress, and secures to 
that body the right to 'declare what is property,' and what. 
as being property, may lawfully be carried from one State 
to another.' 

If there be any flaw in this logic, it must lie in its adop- 
tion of Mr. Clay's doctrine, that the chattelship and the com- 
merce of slaves can not be separated from each other.*] 

* How well the strict letter of the Constitution agrees with Mr. Clay's iden- 
tification of chattelship with commerce; how the Constitution, or how Mr. 
Clay's doctrine would bear upon the free trade and tariff question— or which 
view ought to prevail, we are not now concerned to inquire. We have only to 
construe the Constitution by its own word». 






CHAP. II. — STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 45 

But all this estimate of consequences, is mere lobby talk, 
with which the Court of "strict construction" has nothing, 
on the present occasion, to do. The simple question before 
the Court, is the power of Congress over the foreign and 
domestic slave traffic, and that question resolves itself into 
the question whether slaves are in the eye of law, subjects 
of commerce, at all. If they are, that commerce, with all 
other commerce, within the limits described, is under con- 
gressional control. So "strict construction " must decide, 
without regard to the bearigg the decision may have on the 
tenure of slave property in general. 

An objection has been raised, on the ground that the pow- 
er to " regulate commerce" is not the power to annihilate 
commerce. The objection is groundless for two reasons. 

In the first place, the prohibition of traffic in a particular 
commodity, and between certain specified localities or coun- 
tries, is not an annihilation of commerce, but only a regula- 
tion of it. The mqj|ing of the, traffic in certain commodities 
contraband, does not annihilate commerce. The tariff of 
1S16, designed and operating to exclude the cotton fabrics 
of India, was not an annihilation of commerce. 

But in the second place it has been decided by the Fed- 
eral Courts that the power to regulate commerce does carry 
along with it the power to destroy, to prohibit, to annihilate 
commerce. By the long embargo, under Mr. Jefferson's 
administration, not only foreign commerce, but coast-wise 
commerce between the States and even the fisheries, were 
expressly prohibited and substantially destroyed. And when 
some merchants who had been prosecuted for a breach of 
the embargo law, defended themselves by contesting the 
constitutionality of that law, and on this same plea that " the 
power to regulate commerce is not the power to annihilate 
commerce," no plea nor evidence was offered, on the part 
of the Government, to disprove the alleged fact, that com- 
merce was annihilated by the embargo. The plea in Court 
against the defendants, was, that the power to regulate com- 
merce, being an indefinite and unrestricted power, carried, 
of necessity, along with it the discretionary power, to pro- 
hibit all commerce. The plea was offered as a " strict con- 
struction" plea. Ther'Court adopted it as such, declaring thai 
they must be bound by the icords and not by the consequen- 
ces'oi the Constitution. Judgment was accordingly given 
against the defendants, and the embargo law was sustained. 

To the uninitiated, it may appear somewhat remarkable 
that the same persons who cite' the clause concerning "mi- 
gration and importation " in illustration of the " compromises 



46 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

of the Constitution" in regard to slavery, (inasmuch as the 
power of prohibiting the slave-trade was withheld ns they 
say, from Congress, for twenty years) — should nevertheless 
contradict their own conclusions, by denying that now, after 
the twenlv years are expired, the Congress possesses any 
such power ! It was under their own construction of the Con- 
stitution, that the slave-trade was first tolerated, against the 
then prevailing sentiment of the country, till 1S03, and un- 
der the same construction, it was then abolished to a certain 
extent; and now that a further, exercise of the same power 
is invoked, to complete the prohibition commenced in 1808, 
the constitutional power is denied on the ground that the 
clause does not touch slavery, at all ! But " commerce with 
foreign nations" and commerce " among* the several States" 
are placed on precisely the same footing, in the clause be- 
fore us, under which the foreign slave-trade was abolished. 
In this we have another specimen of the trustworthiness of 
the constitutional expositions, on the subject of slavery, that 
have hitherto prevailed ! 

We dismiss this topic by inviting at'ention to a dilemma, 
of which the opponents of our doctrine may select which 
horn they prefer. 

If the slave States persist in holding the slaves as " goods 
and chattels personal " the law of " goods and chattels per- 
sonal" attaches itself to them, Constitutional Law and the 
laws of Congress not excepted, securing to Congress, under 
this clause of the Constitution, the right of exercising the 
same powers over slave property and slave commerce, as over 
any othe- property and commerce. But the moment the 
slave States determine and affirm that slaves are not. " goods 
and chattels personal — to all intents, constructions, and pur- 
poses whatsoever " — that, moment every slave in those States 
is emancipated, and becomes a freeman— his chattelship 
disappears and he becomes a man in law as welt asm fact. 

"A Republican form of Government." 
We have incidentally adverted, already to the Constitu- 
tional provision that " the United States shall guara.tyi to 

* " Amonz the several States " Does this mean the same as brtn-ccn "the 
several Siates?" The latter phrase would hetur indie ate exclusively a com- 
merce between the citizens of different Stales. " Among" would >ccm to com- 
prehend likewise a traffic " anions" the citizens of the same States, and this 
would authorize Congress to prohibit the buying and selling of slavs entirely 
even "among" the residents of the same neighborhood or village. Noah Web- 
ster tells us i hat" "amon?" means " mixed or mingled wt't&"— *s well as " con- 
joined or associated with, or making a pari of "he number"— whereas " be- 
tween" may '' denote intermediate sDtce, without regard to distance." Were 
we pushed (or an exposition, or desirous of pushing the principle of "strict 
construction" we might m~ke something ol'lhU distinction. Km lei it pass. 

1 11 would seem that ihe frumers of the Constitution were not unacquainted 



CHAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 47 

every State in the Union a republican form of government." 
— Art. 4, Sect. 4. It is time to consider, more directly, this 
provision. What shall we understand by the word " guar- 
anty ?" 

" Guaranty. 1. To warrant; to make true; to undertake or engage that 
another person shall perform what he has stipulated. 2. To undertake 
to secure to another, at all events. 3. To indemnify : to save harmless." 
—Webster's Dictionary. * 

The United States, then, will " warrant," will " make 
sure," " to every State in this Union," ar.dto all the inhab- 
itants thereof, " a republican form of government." The 
United States "undertake or engage" to see to it that other 
persons besides those directly wielding the Federal Govern- 
ment, that the persons charged with the affairs of 'the State 
Governments " shall perform what they have stipulated," 
by maintaining " a republican form of government." The 
United States " undertake to secure, AT ALL EVENTS," 
11 to every State in the Union " the government described. 
The United States will "indemnify," will " save harmless" 
from all attempts in any direction, or from any quarter, to 
subvert such a government. Whatever is incompatible with 
a republican Government, in any of "the Statesof thisUnion," 
" the United" States" have bound themselves to abolish and 
suppress. 

What then, are we to understand by " a republican form 
of government ?" 

« Republic. 1. A commonwealth ; a State in which the exercise of the 
sovereign power is lodged in representatives elected by the people. 2. 
Common interest; lh- public.'' (obs.) &c— Webster's Dictionary. 

"Republican. 1. Pertaining to a Republic; consisting of a common- 
wealth. 2. Consonant to the principles of a republic."— lb. 

If slavery be contrary "to the principles of a republic," 
then slavery is anti-republican, and of course the United 
States have guarantied, to every State in the Union, an ex- 
emption from slavery. But the well " known principles of a 
republic' are— that'" all men are created equal, and are en- 
dowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, 
among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." 
Any government not in accordance with these "principles" 
is not a republican government. » 

" The sovereign power" of a State is not " lodged in rep- 
resentatives elected by the people," in States where one- 
fourth, one-third, or one-half of "Me people" are held in 
slavery, There is no " common interest," no "common- 
wealth" in States where "one-half of the citizens" are "per- 

with the English word " guaranty," and that when they meant lo •' guaranty" 
any thing, they could distinctly and unequivocally say so. 



48 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

mitted" by legislative enactments, " to trample on the rights 
of the other" — to " transform those into despots, and these 
into enemies." 

We are not going beyond th? strict letter of the Consti- 
tution, the meaning of the words it employs, when we say 
this. Our construction is not only not beyond the literal im- 
port of the words, but is based directly upon them. "Strict 
construction" can make nothing more and nothing less out 
of them. 

But in seekiffg to ascertain the literal meaning of the 
words, we are not confined to the dictionaries in common use, 
we may appeiil to ai.y o'her good literary authority for 
the iweani'ig of words just as the compilers of dictiona- 
ries cite standard writers. If the Constitution or : ny oth- 
er leg.^1 instrument uses scientific terms, we must go to the 
masters of science for the meaning of them. If it uses 
Co -:mon Law terms or phrases, we must go to the volumes 
of Common Law to find out the meaning of thern. If H 
employs words in common use among statesmen, civilians, 
and moralists, we must go to eminent statesmen, civilians, 
and moralists, for a definition of the terms. And those of 
the same age and nation, other things being equal, will be 
the best authority for ascertaining the ordinary import of 
the words. This reference to the current literature of a 
people or of their language, to their public documents and 
archives (such as oir National Declar tion of Indepen- 
dence,) or to approved writers and eminent statesmen, to as- 
certain the ordinary import of the language or the words, 
of a written document, like the Constitution, is not only 
permitted but required by the law of " strict construction" 
which confines us to the meaning of th° words, and there- 
fore sets us at work to ascertain, by all the means in our 
power, their pr ccise import. Such a reference is ?iot to be 
confounded with an uppeal to (perhaps) the same literature, 
statesmen, and writers, for the purpose of ascertaining, 
(otherwise than by the meaning of their words,) the inten 
tions, and design*, the motives and the policy of the fra- 
mers of the Constitution, or instrument, under examination. 
With these explanations, we cite some further definitionsof 
" a republican form of government." 

We have so far anticipated this topic as to cite the defi- 
nition contained in the Declaration of Independence. To 
the same point wemigh. also quote the "Bill of Rights," 
"Declarations," Preambles, Constitutions, &c. &c, of the 
different States, which form so prominent a feature of the 
political literature of the age and nation in which our Fed- 



CHAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 49 

eral Constitution was drafted. But we forbear. They are 
too voluminous for convenience — too well known and too 
unequivocal for dispute. They all look to the establish- 
ment of republican government, and they all lav the foun- 
dation of such government in the doctrine that all men are 
born equal, and possess an inalienable right to liberty. They 
make the very pith and essence of a republican government 
to consist in the protection and security of those righ s. 
The political literature of America knows of no other re- 
publicanism than that which recognizes and professedly se- 
cures such rights. 

To quote to proper advantage, Mr. Jefferson's definition 
"f a republican government, would be ?o transcribe a great 
part of his writings. A brief epitome of it we have in 
his Declaration of Independence. We have it likewise 
in such propositions as the following : 

"1. The true foundation of REPUBLICAN GOVERNMENT is the 
equal rights of EVERY CITIZEN, in his person and property, and in 
their management." 

This is equivalent to a flat denial that any government 
can be a "republican government" that is not FOUNDED 
upon " the equal rights of EVERY CITIZEN," &c. And. 
in his Notes on Virginia, the same writer has described the 
legislation of SLAVE STATES as "peimitting one half 
the citizens to trample upon the rights of t v .e other"-r-thus 
explicitly recognizing the slaves as citizens. And the gov- 
ernment thus described, deserves, he says, to be " loaded 
with execration" instead of being cherished as a true re- 
publican government. So says likewise the Constitution of 
the United States, and " guaranties to every State in this 
Union" an exemption from the curse of such an execrable 
government. " The United States" have therefore "guar- 
antied to everv State in this Union" a government foun- 
ded—based upon " the equal rights of EVERY CITIZEN, 
in his person, and property, and in their management." Can 
human language express a more full and unequivocal guar- 
anty than this, of the abolition by "the United States," of 
all the slavery in " every State in this Union ?" 

But let us examine the connected propositions of Mr. 
Jefferson, that his full definition of a " republican govern- 
ment" may be distinctly before us. To the above state- 
ment he adds : 

"2. The rightful power of all legislation is to dpclare and enforce only 
our natural rights and duties, and to take none of them from us. No man 
has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another ; 
and this is all from which the law ought to restrain him. Every man 

\ . 4 



50 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

is under a natural duty of contributing- to the necessities of society, and 
this is all the law should enforce on him. When the laws have declar- 
ed and enforced all this, they have fulfilled their functions." 

" 3. The idea is quite unfounded that on entering into society, we givt 
up any natural right." 

The full bearing of all this upon the legality and validity 
of slave laws, any where and every where, we do not dis- 
cuss now. In another connection we may, if we have 
room, advert to it. What we have to do here is to find out, 
in the light of our current literature and lexicography, the 
meaning of the phrase, " a republican form of govern- 
ment." And the reader will see that Mr. Jefferson's defini- 
tion does not cover the government of a slave State. 

We will next introduce Mr. Madison to the stand, and 
ask Am to. define for us the phrase, " republican form of 
government" Very fortunately for us, Mr. Madison has 
left us his definition in " black and white," published under 
his own eye — a definition framed for the very purpose of tell- 
ing the People of the United States what is a republican 
government, while the question of adopting the Constitu- 
tion was pending their decision. At that precise period it 
was that Mr. Madison, Mr. Jay, and Mr. Hamilton under- 
took, jointly, the task of defending and explaining the Fe- 
deral Constitution, in a series of essays, which were after- 
wards collected together, and published in a volume enti- 
tled, " The Federalist," &c* From an article of Mr. Madi- 
son in this book, we will now present an extract. And 
Mr. Madison was a prominent member of the Convention 
by whom the Constitution had been framed and submitted 
to the States. 

"Number XXXIX," of the Federalist, ■« by James Madi- 
son," contains the following: 

" The first question that offers itself is, whether the general/o/m and 
aspect of the government be strictly republican ? It is evident that no 
other form would be reconeilab'e "with iho nonius of the people of 
America; with the fundamental principles of the Revolution ; or with 
that honorable determination which animates every votary ol 1 REE- 
DOM, to rest a'l our political experiments on the capacity of MAN- 
KIND for SELF-GOVERNMENT. If the plan of the Convention 
therefore, be found to depart from the republican character, its advocates 
must abandon it, as no longer defensible." 

The reader wjjjl please notice, in this paragraph, (1) that 
it is a " republican form of government" that Mr. Madison 
is intent on describing : (2) that he identifies such a form of 
government with, "the fundamental principles of the revo- 
lution" — its self-evident truths, and inalienable human 
rights, (3) with "freedom;" and (4) with a recognition of 

* "The Federalist, on the New Constitution, written in the year 17S8, by 
Mr. Hamilton, Mr. Mudisou, atd Mr. Jay,"'&c. &c. 



CUAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 51 

"the capacity of mankind for self-government." But Mr. 
Madison proceeds : 

" What then, are the distinctive characters of the ripuMican form ?— 
Were an answer to this question lo be sought, not by incurring to prin- 
ciples, bit in the application of the term by political writers, lo the con- 
stitutions of different States, no satisfactory one would ever be found. — 
Holland, in which no particle of the supreme authority is derived from 
the people, has passed almost universally under the denomination of a 
republic. The same title has been bestowed on Venice, where absolute 
power over the great body of the people is exercised, in almost an ab- 
solute manner, by a small body of hereditary nob es. Poland, which is 
a mixture of aristocracy and of monarchy, in their worst forms," hai 
been dignified with the same appellation. The government of England, 
which has one republican branch only, combined with a hereditary aris- 
tocracy and monarchy, has, with equal impropriety, been frequently 
placed on the list of republics. These examples, which are nearly as 
dissimilar to each other as to a genuine republic, show the extreme in- 
accuracy wiih which the term lias been used in political disquisitions." 

The American and modern meaning of the word " repub- 
lican" according to Mr. Madison, is widely different from 
the meaning which soni3 European writers of former times 
had put upon it — a consideration which is of importance to 
be kept in mind. Mr. Madison proceeds still further : 

'•'If we resort for a criterion, to the d : fferent principles on which dif- 
ferent forms of government are established, we may define a republic 
to be, or at least miy bestow that name on, a government which derives 
all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people, and 
is administered by persons holding their offices during pleasure, for a 
Hmrted period, or daring good behavior. It is essential to such a gov- 
ernment, that itbe derive. 1 from the greit body of the society, not from 
an inconsiderable proportion, Oil, a favored class of it ; otherwise a hand- 
ful of tyrannical n ibles, exercising their opp essions by a delegation of 
their pxcers, might aspire to the rank of republicans, and claim for their 
government the honorable title of republic It is sufficient for such a 
government that the persons administering it be appointed, cither di- 
rectly or indirectly, by the people, and that they hold their appoint- 
ments by either of the tenures just specified ; otherwise, every govern- 
ment in the United States, as wall as every other popular government 
that has been or can be well organized or well executed, would be degra- 
ded from the republican character.'' 

Very evidently a slave State can not be a republi 
cordinc to the definition of Mr. Madison. It is essential to 
a republican form of government, says Mr. Madison, that 
its power " be derived from the great body of the society; 
not from an inconsiderable proportion ; OR" from " A FA- 
VORED CLASS OF it." The disjunctive "or" expres- 
ses distinctly, Mr. Madison's denial that a State can have 
"a republican form of government'' whose power is deriv- 
ed from " a favored class" although that favored class may 
be even a majority of the inhabitants. The holding of the 
power by "a favored class" is inconsistent with the "re- 
publican character" of the government. In every slave 
State, the slaveholders, or, if you please, the whites, are " a 
favored class" who hold all the political power ; " exercis- 



52 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

ing their oppressions by a delegation of their powers." In 
some of the States the whites are a minority, in all of them 
the slaveholders, who substantially wield the State govern- 
ments, are. And in the aggregate of all the slave States, 
these " tyrannical nobles" are comparatively, a " handful," 
being less, by estimation, than two hundred and fifty thou- 
sand, in the thirteen slave States, among the seven mil- 
lions of inhabitants of those Slates, and in the presence of 
nearly three millions of slaves. So that the actual slave- 
holders, the only rsally "favored class" in the slave States, 
and on whose behalf this "oligarchy" is maintained, are 
less than one tenth as numerous as the slaves to whom they 
deny all the essential rights of humanity, as well as politi- 
cal power ! If neither Holland, nor England, nor Poland, 
nor Venice, may be called republics — because of their aris- 
tocracies ard their monarchies, what shall be said of our 
slave States ? 

Will it be said that Mr. Madison was treating of Federal 
and not of the Stale governments? That he had no refer- 
ence to the slave States ? or to slavery ? That he did not 
mean to deny the republican character of the slave States ? 
That he would have resisted any such application of his 
doctrine ? 

Some of these statements would first need to be proved. 
But granting, for the argument's sake, that they were all 
true — what then ? It would only make the testimony of 
Mr. Madison the more available for our purpose. For it 
would be giving us the testimony of an opponent, to the 
verity of our premises ! We were not citing Mr. Madi- 
son's opinions about our conclusions ! No. Nor about the 
intentions of the framers of the Constitution. We only 
sought from him a defiiiition of the phrase " republican form 
of government." That definition he has furnished. And 
all impartial men will see that, whatever he intended^ or 
whether he intended anv thing at all, in relation to this 
subject, his definition does as a matter of fact, exclude stave 
States from the list of republics. Incidental testimony, or 
testimony against the interests or the opinions of the wit- 
ness, is the most unimpeachable testimony that can be pro- 
duced. If Mr. Madison's opinions of the subject of sla- 
very and its remedy were altogether coincident with our 
own, or if Mr. Jefferson's were, we should'be charged with 
citing the testimony of " fanatics," the testimony of our 
own partisans and leaders ! 

Mr. Madison teas indeed treating of the Federal and not 
of the State governments. He gave a definition of a "re- 



CHAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 53 

publican form of government" nevertheless. It was the 
meaning of the words we were seeking after. That meaning 
is ascertained. And until it can be made to appear that the 
phrase " a republican form of government," means a govern- 
ment in favor of liberty when applied to the Federal Gov- 
ernment, but means a government in favor of slavery, and 
against liberty, when applied to the government of " every 
State in this Union," it will remain demonstrably certain 
that, by the provisions of the Constitution of 1787-9, " the 
United States shall guaranty to every State in this Union" 
the abolition and the absence of slavery. There can be no 
protest filed against this decision, that shall not amount to 
an appeal from the Court of " strict construction" to that of 
some other tribunal. 

And yet we have other witnesses to produce. Two sep- 
arate Congresses, the one immediately before^ and the other 
immediately after the Federal Constitution was adopted, de- 
liberately and almost unanimously abolished and forever 
prohibited slavery, in the only territory, (as distinguished 
from States) then belonging to the national domain. And 
they saw fit, in this solemn act, to state with precision the 
ground on which this national legislation was based. And 
what was it ? They affirmed that they did so, for the pur- 
pose of " extending "the fundamental principles of civil and 
religious liberty which FORM THE BASIS wherever these 
REPUBLICS, their laws, and their CONSTITUTIONS 
are erected." 

That is, they abolished and forever prohibited slavery in 
the North West Territory, soon to be formed into new 
<; States of this Union" because they wished to " extend" 
prospectively to those States," a republican form of Govern- 
ment" which they could not possess, if slavery remained. 
We stop not to insist now, on the very explicit declaration 
here embodied, that SLAVERY is repuernant to the CON- 
STITUTIONS of the American republics, the States. That 
item may fill a niche in another part of our argument, if we 
should not, in the plenitude of our resources, lose sight of it. 
All we urge here, is simply the definition furnished by the 
two Congresses, just before and after the adoption of the 
Federal Constitution, of the meaning of the terms it employs 
when it speaks of a republican government. We claim that 
this, along with other items of our then current political lite- 
rature, decides the ordinary import of the phrase, und de- 
cides it against the " republican character" of a slave State. 

In attestation of the justness of this claim, we cite another 
witness : General Heath, of Massachusetts. In the Debates 



.54 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

in the Massachusetts Convention of 179S, on the question of 
adopting the Constitution of the United States, Gen. Heath 
having adverted to the subject of slavery, and to the then 
recent act of Congress prohibiting it forever in the North 
West Territory, said, "Bv their oidinance, Congress has 
declared that the new Slates shall be REPUBLICAN 
STATES, and have NO SLAVERY !"*— Deb. Mass. Conv. 
p. 147. 

Thus evident and certain is it that American political lite- 
rature, along with the American Dictionary, so defines "a 
republican form of government" as to exclude slave States 
from coming within the definiiion. 

And American writers, or those of the more modern date, 
are not alone in these views of a republic. The celebrated 
Montesquieu, one of the most distinguished of French au- 
thors, and who died more than twenty years before the De- 
claration of American Independence, in his " Esprit des 
Loix" (Spirit of Laws) first published in 1748, translated 
and republished in England and America, and now for 
eighty years a standard work in both hemispheres, is scarce- 
ly less explicit on this subject. 

" In democracies, where they are all upon an equality, and In aristo- 
cracies where the laws ought to use their utmost endeavors to procure a? 
great an equality as the nature of the government will permit, slavery 

Irf CONTRARY TO THE SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION, Uc.^— Spirit Of 

Laus, Vol. L, Book XV., Chap. I. 

Not only in democracies, then, but even in aristocracies, 
(which we in America do not deign to reckon among repub- 
lics,) this profound writer on the Spirit of the Laws regards 
slavery to be unconstitutional, from the very nature of 
the government ! Yet Montesquieu was educated, and wrote, 
under the old French Monarchy ! Do our American defini- 
tions of "a republican form of government" fall below tho.e 
of a Montesquieu ? Does the definition, in America, now, 
include less of the ideas of liberty, equality, and inalienable 
human rights, than it did in Europe a century ago? We 
are onlv inquiring after the meaning of words. But impor- 
tant changes in the meaning of words may sometimes reveal 
to us impoitant changes in something else. The meaning 
of "a republican form of government" in this country, in 
1789, is sufficiently ascertained. On the present and rising 
generation it may depend, whether it shall long retain any 
meaning at all ! 

We have some further definitions to adduce. 

* Without a direct violation of this ordinance, no fugi'ive slave can be arrett- 
ed in any of the states formed out of the North-Wesiern Territory. This cir- 
cumstance has tveo noticed by James G. Bibnkt and others. 



CHAR. II. — STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 55 

Can that be a republican government which is not even o 
free government ? Some limited monarchies — that of Eng- 
land, for example — are sometimes claimed to be free gov- 
ernments, by those who would not venture to call them re- 
publics. This question settled, we have another. Can that 
be a free government that does not secure and maintain 
freedom of speech and of the press? This latter question, let 
the slave State of Virginia herself answer. 

•'The freedom of the press is one of the great bulwarks of liberty, 
and can never he restrained, but by a DESPOTIC GOVERNMENT/' 

All State Governments, then, that do restrain the freedom 
of the pres c , are " despotic governments," and not republics. 
So says the State of Virginia. But what slave State does 
not restrain freedom of the press ? If there are some of 
them in which such freedom is not- formally prohibited, in 
which of them is it maintained and preserved ? 

The statutes of Louisiana, Tennessee, and other slave 
States, including Virginia herself as adverted to, in our first 
chapter, furnish sufficient answers to these questions. And 
yet the Constitutions of Delaware, Maryland, North Caroli- 
na, South Carolina, Georgia, Louisiana, Kentucky, Tennes- 
see, Mississippi, Alabama, and Missouri, (all of them slave 
States) to say nothing of the Constitutions of the non-slave- 
holding States, are full and explicit in affirming the inviola- 
ble rights of free speech and a free press. By their own 
definiti&riof a republican government, these States therefore, 
or such of them as do not maintain this freedom, are not 
republican States, and the United States have guarantied, 
and warranted, on their behalf, that they shall become so. 

We can afford but little room, here, for further quotations 
from the highly authoritative political literature of our coun- 
try by which the meaning of the phrase "republican form of 
government" is fixed and defined. But there is one speci- 
men now before us, so full and entire, that we must give it 
a place. 

"We the People, hereby ordain and establish this Constitution of Gov- 
ernment, for the State of Delaware. Through Divine goodness ALL 
MEN have by nature the rights of worshipping and serving their Crea- 
tor according to the dictates of iheir consciences, of enjoying and defend- 
ing life ond LIBERTY ; of ACQUIRING and protecting reputation and 
PROPERTY, and in general of obtaining objects suitable to their condi- 
tion, without injury to one another, anil as these rights are essential to 
their welfare, for the due exercise thereof, power is inherent in them ;— 
and THEREFORE, ALL JUST AUTHORITY, in the political institu- 
tions of society, is derived from the PEOPLE, and established with their 
consent, to advance their happiness, and they may, to this end, as cir- 
cumstances require, from time to time, alter their Constitution of Gov- 
ernment." 

The heaven-derived right of ALL men to enjoy* religious- 



,56 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

and civil LIBERTY, to acquire and hold PROPERTY, are 
here explicitly made the very FOUNDATION of those 
"political institutions" whose "authority" is "derived from 
the people" — that is to say — " republican forms of govern- 
ment." The connecting word " therefore" expresses this 
idea, and makes the paragraph as a whole, equivalent to a 
declaration that WITHOUT the security of civil and re ! i- 
gious liberty to "all men, 1 including their right to acquire 
and possess property, such " political institutions" as " re- 
publican forms of government" could not exist. 

By a less rigid definition and "strict construction" of a 
" republican form of government," it might be found difficult 
to establish the claims of our American slave States, or many 
of them, to the character of republics. No one, certainly, 
can question the correctness of that part of Mr. Madison's 
definition, which says, " it is essential* to such a government 
that it be derived from the great body of the society, not 
from an inconsiderable proportion of it." A State, then, gov- 
erned by a minority can not be a republic. But some of the 
slave States, and it is believed, most of them, are governed 
by minorities. In South Carolina, Mississippi, and Louis- 
iana, the slaves themselves, (exclusive of the free people of 
color,) outnumber the white population. When it is remem- 
bered that no colored person can have any share in the gov- 
ernment, though that class are numerous in some of the 
States, and also that very few of the still more numerous 
class of non-slaveholding whiles, (who, in those States, are, 
for the most part, very degraded,) can participate in the 
franchise or hold office, it must be evident that, in most of 
the slave States, the government is in the hands of the mi- 
nority, and that this minority are slaveholders. 

The whole number of slaveholders in the United States 
has been estimated at not more than two hundred and fifty 
thousand. Yet these are distributed in an aggregate popu- 
• lation of above seven millions, in the thirteen slave States, 
the Territory of Florida, and Federal District, according to 
the census of 1840.1 This exhibits a proportion of one to 
twenty-eight. Yet the slaveholders govern. Their propor- 

* This italicising is Mr. Madison's in the paragraph before quoted from the 
Federalist. 

t The census of 1840 exhibits the following. South Carolina. White persons, 
259,084. Free colored persons, 8,276. Slaves, 3^7,038 Mississippi. Free white 
persons, 179,074. Free colored persons, 1,369. >laves, 195,211 Louisiana, 
White persons, 158,457. Free colored persons, 25.502. Slaves, 168,452. Sup- 
pose now. in these States, the s'aves ind free colored persons should form a 
constitution of a " republican form of government," elect officers, and demand 
the Federal guaranty. What must Congress do? "Strict construction" re- 
members that the Constitution says nothing about SLAVES, and nothing about 

OLOR. 



CHAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 57 

tion to the whole adult male population, we can only con- 
jecture or estimate ; but very evidently they must be a small 
minority. The Constitutions of many of these States, mak- 
ing a landed estate a qualification of voters, and especially 
of legislative and executive officers, have virtually secured 
the supremacy of slaveholders. " Fifty acres of land' is re- 
quisite, in several States, to make a voter. A Governor of 
South Carolina, must be worth £1,500 sterling, and a Sena- 
tor £300 "of a settled freehold estate," and a Representa- 
tive " a settled freehold estate of five hundred acres of 'and 
a.t\d ten negroes, or a real estate of £150," &c, &c. In Ten- 
nessee, the Governor must own 500 acres of land, and a 
Senator 200. 

Whether, therefore, we define a republic by its principles, 
its usages, its protection of human rights, or its sovereignty 
of the People, or of a majority of them, the slave States can 
not be called republics. 

We dismiss this topic with a single inquiry. If, by the 
words and the phraseology of this clause, the United States 
have not guarantied to every State in this Union an exemp- 
tion from the extremest possible departure from a republi- 
can government; have'not warranted and secured ti.em 
from a government that shall chatteliztits citizens, " trans- 
forming some into despots .ind others into enemies," permit- 
ting "one-half its citizens to trample on the rights of the 
other," — then we demand what it is that these words and 
phrases do signify ? And what " form of government" the 
United States may not. permit to be established and main- 
tained in the different States, without a breach of the guar- 
anty ? 

Security of Liberty : — " Due Process of Law." 

The Constitution prepared by the Convention, in 1787, 
amo.'.g its declared and leading objects, as set forh in its 
first sentence, had distinctly enunciated its intent to "secure 
the blessings of liberty to ourselves, and our posterity." 
Yet the People, it seems, were desirous of some more spe- 
cific declaration of the manner in which this security was to 
be extended to them. So says the record of those times. 

" The Conventions of x number of the States, having, at the time of 
their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent 
misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory anil re- 
strictive clauses should be adiled. Congress, at the session begun and 
held m the city of New York, on Wednesday, the 4th of March, 1789, 
proposed to the legislatures of the several States, twelve amendments, 
ten of which onlv were adopted."— Federclist, page580. 

Among these amendments was the one from which we 



OS AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

extract the following. We copy so much as relates to our 

subject. 

K So person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous 
crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a grant! .]uryy ; &c, &c, 
* * * • "N 0R be deprived of life, LIBERTY, or property, without 
DUE PROCESS OF LaW," &c, &c, &c— Amendments, Article V. 

It is to be observed and kept in mind that these " amend- 
ments" to the Constitution^ added as they were, after the 
adoption of the original instrument itself, possess of necessi- 
ty , and in their own nature, a corrective, a revisory charac- 
ter. They are not simply additions to the instrument ; they 
are, what they are denominated, "amendments," alterations 
perhaps, — changes. If one clause or article of the' original 
document had appeared to conflict, or had been found to 
conflict with another, it might have seemed difficult to de- 
cide upon their conflicting claims. For oneclause, (it might 
be thought,) should be to be regarded as of equal authority 
with another. Not so, when one of the conflicting clauses 
should be found in the original instrument, and the other in 
an "amendment." The "amendment" very manifestly, 
takes precedence, and displaces, annuls, repeals, abrogates, 
erases, whatever in the original instrument is found to con- 
flict with it. 

Suppose it should have been found, then, or suppose we 
should now grant, for the argument's sake, thaft all the 
parts of the original Constitution, already examined, are in 
favor of slavery, and none of them in favor of its abolition : 
suppose it were an admitted fact, that the clauses concern- 
ing " persons held to service and labor" — concerning " ap- 
portionment of representatives and direct taxes" — concern- 
ing " migration or importation" — concerning the "suppres- 
sion of insurrection" — " protection against domestic vio- 
lence" — and concerning " the reserved rights of the States" 
— suppose, we say, it were certain that each and every one 
of these clauses did "guaranty" or did tolerate by "com- 
promise" the existence of Southern slavery : — suppose fur- 
ther, that the original Constitution had contained no declar- 
ation of the purpose and intent to " secure the blessings of 
liberty," union, justice, tranquility, common defence and 
general welfare — had contained no grant to Congress of 
-powers for the accomplishment of these ends, no declaration 
that the " Constitution of the United States and laws of 
Congress, made in pursuance thereof," should be held to 
be the " supreme law of the iand" — suppose Congress had 
been clothed with no powers over " commerce with foreign 
nations, and among the several States" — suppose the Uni- 



CHAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION.' 59 

ted Siate3 had not guarantied "to every State in this 
Union a republican form of government," or that such a 
o-uaranty did not amount to a guaranty against slavery — 
what then? If, am mg the subsequent "AMEND- 
MENTS" to the Constitution, there can be found a tingle 
clause, or fraction of a clause, that either restricts or abol- 
ishes slavery by its own inherent efficacy and operation, or 
authorizes Congress, or enables the National Judiciary to 
restrict or abolish slavery, then that clause or fraction of a 
clause,' beimr an "amendment" an alteration, a repeal of all 
that shall be found to conflict with it in the original instru- 
ment, and supplying the omissions and defects of the same, 
provides for the abolition or restriction of slavery as effectu- 
ally as if, in all the preceding particulars, the Constiiution, 
as first adopte.d, had been the reverse of what our supposi- 
tion has described. 

This being premised, we proceed to consider this fifth 
Article of Amendments. The supposition just now made, 
that the original Constitution had "guarantied slavery,*' 
(if our opponents choose to retain it,) will do us no manner 
of harm, here. We are now to inquire after the meaning 
of an amendment. And if it were true that the People of 
the United States had pledged themselves to suppress in- 
surrections of slaves, to return fugitives from slavery, and 
in other ways to become the drudges and tools of the " pe- 
culiar institution," thus involving themselves in its guilt, 
its disgrace, and its dangers ; such a circumstance, one 
would think, might well entitle them to have some share in 
defining the slavery they had "guarantied," — to assist in 
prescribing its tenure and its conditions — io" declare who 
shall " be deprived of their liberty," and by what " process" 
they should be thus deprived of it. Otherwise they could 
not know what they, had ' : guarantied," nor whether they 
themselves and their posterity might not become the ciclims 
of the guaranty ! 

But whether the original Constitution contained a guar- 
anty of shivery or not, it was confessedly thought important 
to define the conditions of liberty, and io say in what man- 
ner a " person" living under our government, could be 
"deprived" of so inestimable a blessing. The clause be- 
fore us contains that definition. What is its meaning ? 
What do the words say, in their ordinary import and accep- 
tation ? A " strict construction" is all we ask for, now, 
and that we shall insist upon. 

" No person shall be deprived," &c. That is, no " indi- 
vidual human being, consisling of body and soul" — (ns 



60 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

Noah Webster hath it) — no " man, woman or child" "shall 
be deprived of liberty, &c, without due process of law.'' 

Shall be deprived of liberty — i.e. " the power of acting 
as one thinks tit, without restraint or control, except from 
the laws of nature." — Noah Webster. 

" Withoui due process of law" — " Process. — In Law : — 
the whole course of proceeding, in a cause, real or personal, 
civil, or criminal, from the original writ, to the end of the 
suit.'' 1 — JSoah Webster. 

In order to understand the full power and significancy 

of this phrase, " due process of law" which the writer of 

this Amendment took of course, from the vocabulary of our 

Courts of Justice, and from the accredited law literature of 

our language, we must trace it back to its early use, and 

fohow it down to the present time. 

" These words," says Alvan Stewart, " from the days of King John, 
in the Vale of Kunney Meade, to the day of the final adoption of the 
Feueial constitution, have been employed and understood, as ha- 
ving certain and fixed ideas." " The sturdy barons and wise men of 
England, compelled a volatile Xing to subscribe Magna Charta 500 
years ago, containing the words of our ' Article/ and lrom that day to 
this, eveiy Englishman and American has claimed, as a part of his in- 
heritance anu biitlirigiit, the invaluable principle that ' no person shall 
be deprived of his life, Eli!EK'i\, or property, without due process of 
law.* in fact this constitutional provision is nothing but one of those 
invaluable principles, priceless in character, drawn lrom the vast quar- 
ry of the common law." "It is believed that no lawyer in this coun- 
try or England, who is worthy the appellation, will deny that the true 
and only meaning oi the phrase ' due process of law' is an indictment or 
presentment of a Grand Jury, of not less than twelve nor more thsn 
twenty- three men, a trial by a petit jury of twelve men, and a judgment 
pronounced, on the finding of that jury, by a Court.-"* 

Judge Story, in his Commentaries upon the Constitution 
of the United States, (as cited by Alvan Stewart, Esq.,) 
speaking of this sentence of this Article of the Constitu- 
tion, says : — 

" The other part of the Clause is but an enlargement of the language 
of RJagna Charta, 'nee super cum ibimus, nee super cum mittimus, nisi per 
legale judicum parium suorium vel per legem terra:, —next her will we pass 
upon, mm, or condemn lam, Out by the taujul judgment of his pters, o; by 
the law of the land.— Lord Coke su>s that these latter words, ' per Ugem 
terra, (by the law of the land,) mean 'by due process of law, ■ that is, 
without uue presentment, or indictment, and being brought in to an- 
swer thereto, ' by due process of law.' fco that this Clause, in efiect, 
affirms the right of trial, according to process and proceedings of com- 
mon law." 

The terms employed in this amendment are thusdefined, 
and its meaning ascertained. It says that M no individual 
human being, consisting of body and soul ; no man, woman, 
or child," in these United States, or under the sheltering 

* See Constitutional Argument, on this Clause, 1 y Aiaak Stewart, Esq., in 
the " Friend of Man," October 18, lb37, from which our argument, on this 
topic, is chiefly taken, in a condensed and modified form. 



CHAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 61 

wing of its Constitution, shall be deprived of liberty, (of the 
power of acting as one thinks fit, without restraint or con- 
trol, except from the laws of nature,) without due process of 
law, without indictment by a grand j ury, f rial and conviction 
by a petit jury, and corresponding judgment of a Court. 

Every M individual human being, with a body and a soul ; 
man, woman, or child," within the United States, deprived 
of liberty without indictment, jury trial, and judgment of 
Court, is therefore unconstitutionally deprived of liberty. 
A " strict construction" of the Constitution can result in no 
other decision than this. For this is taking the Amend- 
ment according to the literal meaning of the words. 

"If this be true," says Mr. Stewart, "any judge in the United States, 
who is clothed with sufficient authority to grant a writ of Habeas Corpus, 
and decide upon a return made to such a wri', on the master and slave 
being brought before said judge, to inquire by what authority he, the 
master, held the slave, if the master could not produce a record of con- 
viction, by which the particular slave had been deprived of his liberty, 
by indictment, trial, and judgment of a Court, the judge would be obli- 
ged under the oath which he must have taken, to obey the Constitution 
of his country, to discharge the slave, and give him his full liberty." 

Come forward, now, ye claimants of a slavery under 
" guaranty of the Constitution of the United Slates !" — 
And come, ye claimants of "the compromises of the Con- 
stitution" in favor of slavery ! What say you ? Do ye 
still continue to urge the claim ? If so, prepare to abide the 
result of your claims. If there are any such compromises 
or guaranties in the original instrument, (the Constitution 
of 1787-9,) then, along with those " compromises" or 
"guaranties" you must take the provisions of this Amend- 
ment, which (in case the Constitution has "recognized" any 
slavery at all) have specifically defined the slavery thus re- 
cognized, and fixed the bounds which it can not pass. — 
Search now for your constitutional slaves, deprived of lib- 
erty, by " due process of laio /" By personal indictment, 
trial, verdict, and judicial sentence ? Where are they ? 
Or who is the claimant of such a slave ? You claim as 
strict constructionists, your " pound of flesh, according to 
the bond :" Take it then, i ut take the precise, the specified 
pound, and take not a fraction more. 

More than half a century has rolled by, since this 
Amendment became the "supreme laic of the land." But 
no " individual human being" now held as a slave has ever 
been " deprived of liberty by due process of law." No one 
will pretend this. On the principle of " strict construction" 
then, the principle of abiding by the literal meaning of the 
words of the Constitution, the Congress of the United States 
are authorized and called upon, by the facts of the case, to 



62 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

pass a declaratory act, recapitulating the facts, and declaring 
each and every "individual human being, with a body and 
a soul, maji woman, or child," now held in bondage, in the 
United States, yet not " deprived of liberty, by due process 
of law," to be free. "All presumptions are to be made in 
favor of liberty," and therefore all who can not be proved to 
have been " deprived of liberty* by due process of law" must 
be adjudged free. 

If the " peculiar" claim shrinks from this judgment, it 
must abandon "strict construction" altogether — must take 
its cause out of that Court, ox wait the proper time for filing 
an appeal to another tribunal. 

More than this it must do. It must take especial care not 
to urge either its pretended " compromises" or its " guaran- 
ties" of the "peculiar" interest, either before the Court of 
" strict construction" or any where else ! For the moment it 
does this, it endorses a principle that arms this same notable 
fifth article of Amendments, with all the formidable powers 
we have claimed for it, and there is no escape from its grip. 
Establish, by any principle of construction, the constitutional 
guaranties and compromises of slavery in the original Con- 
stitution, and you establish both the principle and the fact 
that the United States and the Federal Government, are 
icsponsible, politically and morally, responsible to the Peo- 
ple, to posterity, and to high heaven, for the continued exist- 
ence of that gigantic crime and curse. And how shall the 
United States, and the Federal Government escape from 
those responsibilities or honor them ? In no way that we 
can think of, (in such a case,) more conveniently or legally, 
more effectually or more speedily, than by taking the claim- 
ants at their loord: conceding to them, {if they will have it 
so,) that the original Constitution contained the " compro- 
mises" and the " guaranties" claimed — but insisting withal, 
that the fifth article of Amendjsjents, with its paramount 
authority over the compromises and guaranties of the ori- 
ginal instrument which it now modifies and changes, in 
virtue of its amendatory powers, has defined, restricted and 
circumscribed the slavery thenceforth to be compromised or 
guarantied, confining it within the constitutional limits there- 
in specified, viz: — the enslavement of those deprived of their 
liberty " by due process of law." 

If the word "person" in the original instrument, means a 
slave, then the word "person" in the fifth article of the 
Amendments means a slave. If the condition of the slave 
is described bv the phrase " persons held to service and labor" 
then the condition of the slave is described in the words, 



CHAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 63 

" N» person shall be deprived of liberty, without due process 
of law." An J so the construction of the original instrument, 
relied upon to establish slavery, abolishes it, when applied 
to the amendment.* 

Another dilemma is thus presented, on either horn of 
which, at its pleasure, the " peculiar" claim is at liberty to 
swing-. If the Constitution has "guarantied or has 
compromised" with slavery, then it has DEFINED it: 
and the definition is recorded in this fifth article of 
amendments. 

It will be of no use to plead in the Court, of "strict con- 
struction" that such could not have been the intentions of 
those who drafted this clause. The question here is not 
what they intended, but what they the People have done, by 
adopting that clause. It tells its own story and there is no 
escape from its meaning. 

Many a litigant has found, to his cost when in Court, that 
the instrument to whicji he hadsubscribed his name, a long 
lime before, expresses something that he did not intend, when 
he signed it. But the Court decides according to the ideas 
expressed in the document, and not according to his own state- 
ment of his intentions. We are in Court, now, and a Court, 
too, that always sticks close to the " strict letter of the law." 

Slavery in the Territories and Federal District. 

" The Congress shall have power to dispose of, ami make all needful 
rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging 
to the United 1 States, and nothing in this Constitution shall be so con- 
strued as to prejudice any claims of the United States, or of any particu- 
lar State.'' — Constitution U. S., Art. IV., Sect. 3, Clause 2. 

The next previous clause had provided for the admission 
of new States into the Union. One of the earliest acts of 
Congress after the organization of the Government, under 
the Federal Constitution, was the act forever prohibiting 
slavery in the North West Territory, the only Territory then 
belonging to the United States. And no demur has ever 
been made on the ground that Congress did not possess the 
constitutional power. This would seem to settle the ques- 
tion, if any question of the kind could be raised, whether 
Congress possesses power to abolish slavery, in any other 
Territory or District belonging to the United States. But 
in respect to our present Territory of Florida, including the 
States formed out of the Territory of Louisiana, and the 
District of Columbia, we are authorized to occupy even 
higher ground. We present a view of this ground in the 

* Vide 4th of July Address by H. E. Smith, Esq. at West Galway, 1844, in Al- 
bany Patriot, of Aug. 14. 



64 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

words of some Resolutions adopted by aLiberty Convention 
in Ohio, and afterwards at similar conventions, at Buffalo, 
and elsewhere. 

"That the laws of France in virtue of which slavery ex- 
isted in the Territory of Louisiana; the laws of Spain, in 
virtue of which slavery existed in the Territory of Florida; 
and the laws of Virginia and Maryland in virtue of which 
slavery existed in the District of Columbia, ceased to be in 
force at the moment when said Territories and District were 
ceded to the United States, and consequently every slave 
therein, became, at that moment, free. 

" That all acts of Congress, for the continuance of slavery 
in the Territories of Louisiana and Florida, and in the Dis- 
trict of Columbia, after the cessions, became null and void, 
not only by reason of the want of power in Congress to pass 
such acts, but because they are in direct conflict with the 
fifth article of the Amendments of the Constitution, which 
declares that ' no person shall be deprived of life, Liber- 
ty or property, without due process of Law,' and also in 
conflict with the Preamble of the Constitution which declares 
the establishment of Justice to be one of the chief objects 
of its formation. 

"That all constitutional provisions and laws of the States 
created within the limits of the Territory of Louisiana, and 
all acts of Congress admitting such States into the Union, 
so far as such provisions, laws, or acts, authorize or sanction 
slaveholding, are also null and void, because in conflict with 
the same article of the Amendments." 

The argus eyes of the slave power and its sycophants, 
northern and southern, have never pretended' to discoverany 
provision, in any article, section, or clause in the Constitu- 
tion of the United States, by virtue of which Congress or 
the United States are vested with the power of establishing 
slavery any where. " Strict construction" or any other sort 
of " construction" may search the instrument, in vain, for any 
thing of that description, or looking, even remotelv in that 
direction — to be construed! And the tenth article of Amend- 
ments may remind us that the Federal Government holds 
no powers not conferred in the Constitution. We are a little 
curious to know by what arguments those who deny the 
power of Congress to abolish slavery, will undertake to prove 
the power of Congress to create slavery. But if it has no 
power to create slavery, then slavery in the Federal District 
and Territories is unconstitutional, and the Federal Courts are 
bound, whenever a case comes before them, thus to decide. 
If slavery, in Florida and the District of Columbia, is con- 



CHAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 65 

stitutional, then slavery might be established by Congress 
at West Point, or any other spot, at which "forts, magazines, 
arsenals, dock-yards, and other needful buildings" of the 
United States may be constitutionally " erected," and slave- 
ry would then be constitutional at all those places — a result 
too absurd for belief. Examine the Constitution and see if 
it be not so. 

The Constitution and the District of Columbia, 

" The Congress shall have' power"— " to exercise cxclusirc legislation 
in all cases what soever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) 
as may, hy cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, 
become the seat of government of the United Slates, and to exercise like 
authority over all places purchased, by consent of the lcgislatuie of the 
State in which the same shall be, for the erection, of forts, magazines, ar- 
senals, dock-yards, and other needful buildings.''" — Art. I, Sect. 8, Clause 16. 

" Like authority." These words are too plain to admit 
or require any explanation. Can Congress, under this clause, 
or by any other warrant, establish slavery at the navy-yard 
in Brooklyn, or at the arsenal in Springfield ? If not, then 
it can not in the District of Columbia, and slavery is illegal 
there.* 

Maintaining, as we do, the power of Congress to abolish 
slavery even in the States, and denying-, as we do, the pre- 
sent legality of slavery in the Federal District and Territory 
of Florida, &c; &c, we are scarcely able to enter, with much 
interest, into the question that has been so strangely mooted 
of late years, whether Congress has power to abolish slavery 
in the District of Columbia ! But if any one wishes to exa- 
mine that question, on the old grounds, it is pertinent to 
notice the " exclusive legislation in all cases ivhatsoever" 
which Congress, under the Constitution, exercises over the 
District. 

"Exclusive.' No other legislative power on earth pre- 
tends to any legislative power over the District. Those who 
deny the power of Congress to abolish slavery in the District 
never undertake to tell us what legislature does possess that 
power. 

14 Exclusive legislati ?i," we are sometimes reminded, in 
this connection, does not mean unlimited legislation. Cer- 
tainly it does not ; and this is the very reason why Congress 

* The reader is doubtless apprised of the fact that after the cession of the 
District of Columbia by Virginia and Maryland, and just before the appointed 
time for its coming into possession of the United States, the Congress of the 
United States enacted a law re-enacting in a lump, the laws of Maryland, for 
that part of the District east of the Potomac, and the laws of Virginia for that 
part of the District west of the Potomac This act was an unconstitutional 
establishment of slavery in the District, without which act the slaves would 
have been freed. 

5 



66 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

does not possess power to create slavery in the District. 
But " exclusive legislation, in all cases whatsoever," does 
mean ail such just and righteous legislation as is appropriate 
and proper for all other civil gover?iments to exercise. So 
that there is no escape from the conclusion that Congress 
can constitutionally abolish slavery in the District of Co- 
lumbia, but by affirming (as some have done) that no govern- 
ment on earth has a right to abolish slavery I And, with 
characteristic consistency, this ground is assumed by those 
who deny the inalienable rights of man by affirming that 
" what the law makes property IS property ;" so that, though 
legislation can create slavery, yet legislation can not abolish 
it ; in other words, that man possesses but one inalienable 
right, and that this is the right of slaveholding — the right 
of invading with impunity all the equal rights of his brother ! 
It can not be expected by any reasonable person that we 
should waste time in the useless attempt to reason with 
such, or to make their absurdities more manifest than they 
already are. 

We say nothing here, to the plea of " implied understand- 
ings" — " consent of citizens of the District," the " wishes of 
Virginia and Maryland," &c. &c, because " strict con- 
struction" rules all such considerations out of the Court. 
It will not permit the jury to hear them. In another place 
we may look at them, and a glance should suffice. If any 
one, however, would be conducted over the whole ground, 
and feel his way, step by step, let him peruse Theodore D. 
Weld's " Powerof Congress over the District of Columbia," 
originally published in the New York Evening Post, under 
the signature of Wythe — a work hitherto unanswered, and 
containing a mass of important information, along with a 
force and demonstration of argument that will sufficiently 
account for the absence of a reply. 

One or two things require to be noted, before dismissing 
this topic. There are no "reserved rights of the States" to 
be pleaded, on behalf of the slaveholders of the District. — 
Nor, (whatever may be said of the grounds we have taken 
on the clause concerning "persons held to service and labor 
in one State, under the laws thereof, and escaping to ano- 
ther") can any persons, under that clause, be " delivered up, 
on the claim of the party to whom such service or labor may 
be due," in the case of such as, instead of escaping from . 
one State to another, shall escape to or from the Federal 
District. That soil, at least, is as sacred from the pollu- 
tion of legalized, constitutional slavery, as is the soil of 
England itself. Slaves can not breathe there. There is 



CHAP. II. — STRICT CON6TEUCTI0N. 67 

no earthly power that can, there, legally enslave them. The 
moment they touch that, ten mile square, they are, legally, 
as free as the President of the United States himself, and 
can no more be lawfully enslaved there, or carried away into 
slavery, or made slaves on leaving the Federal District, 
than the President can. Whenever law is properly admin- 
istered, by a competent and faithful Judiciary, this decision 
will stand by the side of that of Lord Chief Justice Mans- 
field, in the case of John Somerset. 

This is manifestly true, if Congress had no constitutional 
authority to create slavery in that District, there being no 
slavery there, except by authority of Congress. But if Con- 
gress has power to create slavery there, it has power to abol- 
ish it — power to repeal the law that created it. Another 
dilemma, for the benefit of whom it may concern. 

Restrictions on State Power. 

Hitherto we have considered the duties and powers of the 
Federal Government, under the Constitution of 1787-9, in 
relation to the existence of slavery, whether for its guaranty 
or its abolition. We are now to inquire whether the same 
Constitution has inhibited or restricted the power of the 
States to establish or maintain slavery, by any of the specific 
provisions of that document. 

The explicit guaranty, by the United States, of a " repub- 
lican form of government" -to "every State in this Union," 
has already been noticed, along with the other responsibili- 
ties of the National Legislature. And it has been shown 
that such a guaranty is equivalent to a guaranty against 
slavery. A " guaranty — an undertaking, or engagement, 
by a third person or party, that the stipulations of a treaty 
shall be observed by the contracting parties, or one of them." 
— Webster's Dictionary. 

This language implies that in coming into the Union, under 
the Federal Constitution, the several States entered into 
certain stipulations with each other, that one of those stipu- 
lations was the maintenance of a "republican form of gov- 
ernment," and that the United States guarantied the due 
observance of this stipulation, and engaged to see to it, that 
the governmentof each State should be republican. In the 
very act of ratifying the Constitution of the United States 
which contained this clause, " every State in this Union" 
did stipulate and agree to maintain " a republican form of 
government," and did agree that "the United States" shall 
see the stipulation, on the part of each State, observed. 

But this mention of a republican government was in gene- 



68 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

ral terms. We shall see now whether the same Constitu- 
tion imposes anv particular prohibitions or restrictions upon 
the States, by provisions that go into details, and vitally 
affect the republican character of a State. 

Article I., Section 10, imposes a variety of restrictions up- 
on the States — some of them incidental to their new position 
as members of a more extensive government, entrusted with 
the foreign relations of the country, its currency, its army, 
its navy, its commercial polity, &c. With these prerogatives 
of the General Government, the States were not to interfere. 
But along with these inhibitions were others, of a different 
character, and looking directly to the security of individual 
rights, the preservation of republican equality among the 
People. 

"No State shall * * * pass any bill of attainder ', ex post facto law, or 
law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility." — 
Art. L, Sect. 10, Clause 1. 

The next clause of the same section provides that c No State shall • * * 
keep troops * * * in time of peace, or engage in war, unles- actually in- 
vaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay. ; ' 

" Attainder. — 1. Literally, a staining, corrupting, or rendering im- 
pure; a corruption of blood. 2. The judgment of death, or sentence of a 
competent tribunal upon a person convicted of treason or felony, which 
judgment attaints, taints or corrupts his blood, so that he can no longer 
inherit lands. 3. The act of attainting.'-"— Webster's Dictionary. 

That which the dictionary describes as the judgment or 
sentence of a tribunal, is what the Constitution says the 
State Constitutions and State Legislatures shall not enact. 
Particularly, they shall "pass no bill" — enact no statute, 
that does this thing. It may not do it, even in the case of a 
person " convicted of treason or felony." Even for those 
crimes, it may not " taint or corrupt his blood, so that he 
can no longer inherit lands." Of course it may not do this, 
in the case of a person convicted of the crime of having 
been born of a slave mother, or in the case of innocent per- 
sons, charged with no crime ! 

But every slave State has its bill of attainder, without 
which not a single slave coujd be held in the State ; and the 
repeal of which would be the abolition of slavery. 

Every slave in America is a human being thus attainted. 
The slave code thus attaints him. It says expressly, " Slave* 
can not take by descent." They can not rje heirs. They 
can not inherit, or hold lands. They can receive and hold 
nothing by will or bequest. " The slave can hold no pro- 
perty." 

' Every slave in America, not imported from abroad, (and 
such importations have been prohibited since 1S03,) is a 
slave because attainted, corrupted in blood, by lhAslave law. 



CHAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 69 

It is a bill of attainder running from generation to genera- 
tion without lim.tationor end ! The slave child follows the 
condition of the mother. "The noblest blood of Virginia 
runs in the veins of slaves, 1 ' and is attainted by this bill of 
attainder. The sons and daughters of Presidents, and Gov- 
ernors, and members of Congress — the " posterity" of those 
who framed and adopted the Federal Constitution " to se- 
cure the blessings of liberty to themselves and (their) pos- 
terity," are corrupted by these bills of attainder in the slave 
States, "so th t they can no longer inherit lands," or hold 
in legal possession a dung-hill fowl or a pig! The wide 
world knows all this, and no one is so stupid or so emulous 
of being accounted an ignoramus as to call it in question. 
Where then, is the clause of the Constitution of the United 
Stales that prohibits the States from passing bills of attain- 
der ? Has it any efficacy, or power ? Has it any meaning ? 

" Contracts." — " No State shall pass any law * * * 
impairing the obligation of contracts" — Constitution. 

" The slave can make no contract." " No contract made 
with a slave shall be binding." "The slave can not even 
contract marriage." " A slave can make no bargain, bar- 
ter, or sale." — Laws of Slave States. 

To buy any thing of a slave is a grave offence, in some 
of the slave Stafes. 

The very words of the Federal Constitution, and of the 
laws of the slave States are here brought into direct and 
harsh collision. What the former forbids to be done by the 
States, the latter emphatically does. 

A merchant or a ship-master visits Wilmington, North 
Carolina. He enters into the shop cf a cooper. He finds 
the boss cooper. apparently as white a man as himself. He 
contracts with him to put in order for shipping, a cargo of 
staves and heading he has just purchased. The job may 
amount to some two hundred dollars or more. The cooper, 
with his gang of hands, goes about the work. By contract 
he receives fifty dollars in advance, to distribute among his 
hands, or for other uses. The next day the cooper is miss- 
ing. It turns out that he was a slave. His master has other 
work for him. He had permitted him, for a monthly sti- 
pend, to drive his trade, for himself; but he has altered his 
mind, or a creditor has seized upon the cooper, or he is sold, 
and is on the way to Louisiana. , What shall the ship-mas- 
ter do, for the fifty dollars ? Can he claim it of the cooper's 
slave-master? No! Can he claim it of the cooper, if he 
can find him ? No! But why not ? Because the State of 
Norih Carolina has " passed a bill impairing the obligation 



70 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

of contracts" — has enacted that no contract formed by the 
child or grand-child of a slave mother, to the thousandth 
generation, can be binding! 

A slave contracts matrimony. Is the contract honored as 
binding? No! Because the law of slavery has impaired 
the obligation of contracts. 

A slave owner is in the habit of sending an active slave 
to market, with his produce. He is even permitted by the 
master to contract sales beforehand. You bargain with 
him for a wagon load of flour, or of bacon, to be delivered 
in three days. You bargain before competent witnesses, 
and deliver rtome goods or money in advance. The day 
comes, and brings the market man with his load of produce ; 
but he unloads at your neighbor's door instead of yours. 
You remonstrate, but in vain. The slave master has order- 
ed the produce delivered to pay au old debt, or (more prob- 
ably) to get a higher price, or to cheat you out of your «-id- 
vanced payment which he has appropriated to himself. 
Have vou any redress? No. And simply because the 
State has passed a kw, " impairing the obligation of con- 
tracts."* 

A slave bargains with his master for the price of his free- 
dom. He takes his master's written agreement signed with 
his own. hand. Once a year he pays him one hundred dol- 
lars, according to agreement, and takes his master's receipt. 
In ten years the whole payment is completed, and he asks 
for free papers. Can he demand them ? No. Can he get 
his money back again? No. Do the written agreement 
and the receipts avail him anything? No. But why not? 
Simply because the State has " passed a law impairing the 
obligation of contracts /" t 

Are such laws constitutional ? If they are, what does 
this clause of the Constitution mean ? We do not stop to 
ask what it is worth ! We are in the Court of " strict con- 
struction" now, searching after the meaning of words I 

"Nobility."—" No State shall grant any title of nobility.''— Consti- 
tution, t 

But what is a title of nobility ? 

"Nobility. * * * (Among other definitions,) • • * "Distinc- 
tion by blood, usually joined with riches" The qualities which constitute 



*The case described actually occurred at Wilmington, N. C , some years 
ago, during the writer's residence- there. The slaveholder was a citizen of 
high standing, in political life. 

t Another casp, of not unfrequent occurrence. More than one fugitive 
slave has come to the North, within a few years past, with all the doci ments 
inhispossession-the written agreement, the several receipts covering Lie 
sum stipulated, and yet has been obliged to run from the chase of blood-hounds 
to get his freedom. 



CHAP. II. — STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 7} 

distinction in rank, in civil society, according to the customs or laws of a 
country." — Webster's Dictionary. 

41 Title. — An appellation of dignity, distinction or pre-eminence, given 
to persons, as, a duke. A name, an appellation.'" — lb. 

"The institution of domestic slavery supersedes the necessity of an 
order of nobility, and all the other appendages of a hereditary system of 
government." — Message of Gov. McDuffie of South Carolina. 

That is to say, it answers, substantially, the same ends — 
is essentially, the sa?ne thing under another name. 

The slave State grants the "name," the "appellation" of 
slave owner. It grants unlimited powers and high " digni- 
ties" along with the name or " title." The " qualities which 
constitute" a slaveholder carry with them, and " constitute 
distinction in rank, in civil society, according to the customs 
or laws of (this) country." In some of the States, a man 
must be a slaveholder in order to be eligible to certain offi- 
ces. It is so far a " distinction by blood" that " white" per- 
sons only can be slaveholders, and children of slave mothers 
must always be slaves, and can not be slave owners. The 
claim is founded much on the superiority of the " Anglo- 
Saxon blood" to the " African." 

The "distinction in rank, in civil society," which the 
slave owner holds " according to the customs or laws of this 
country," corresponds very nearly to that of the higher 
castes of the Asiatic nations, the feudal lords or barons, in 
the middle ages in Europe, and still retained by the nobility 
in Russia. This parallel is frequently insisted on, by the 
advocates of slavery, in justification of the "institution ," 
and in proof of its conservative character, and its patri- 
archal antiquity. The very phrase — " political institution" 
with which it is dignified by its friends, is proof that they 
claim for it the honors of "a system, a plan of society es- 
tablished by law," for the promotion of political ends.* As 
a political institution, a "system or plan of society" estab- 
lished by State legislation, it changes the whole frame-work 
of the government in those States, nay, in the United States, 
as a general government — the very thing that the clause be- 
fore us was obviously framed to prevent. As a "political 
institution" it is cherished and valued and defended by states- 
men who perfectly understand and admit the unprofitable- 
ness of slave labor. Like other political institutions of a 
similar character, it is wielded for the exclusive benefit of 
the privileged caste at the expense of all others. It ope- 
rates to withdraw political power from the mass of the peo 
pie, the laboring population, and confer it upon a select few, 
which is the very description or definition of aristocracy, or 
government of nobles. 

* See Webster's definition of an "Institution." 



72 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

" Aristocracy. — A form of government, in which the whole supreme 
power is vested in the principal persons of a. State."— Webster's Dictionary. 

"The supreme power" of the slave States is vested al- 
most exclusively in those " principal persons of (the) State," 
the slaveholders, as has been shown in another connection. 
This privileged class of 250,000 — this "peculiar" "order of 
nobility" that governs the slave States, constitutes but about 
one sixty-eighth part of the aggregate seventeen millions of 
inhabitants of the United States. Yet '.his petty oligarchy 
holding its " title" to the political powers of an "order of 
nobility" by virtue of the legislation of the States wherein 
they reside, and which they control at their bidding, have 
succeeded likewise in controlling the National Government 
itself, monopolizing, almost in perpetuity, the highest offices 
in the nation, moulding the national policy and wielding the 
national resources (through the legislative, executive, and 
judicial departments) for the exclusive benefit and aggran- 
dizement of the caste, regardless, utterly, of all other inter- 
ests, either sectional or national, whenever they come in 
competition, as they can not fail to do, with the " peculiar 
institution" — its stability, and its claims. All trrs, we re- 
peat it, is done by one sixty-eighth part of our whole popu- 
lation — by a body of men whose aggregate numbers amount 
to little more than one-half tho number of legal voters in the 
single State of New-York ! All this too, by virtue of State 
legislation, which if repealed or annulled, would instantly 
annihilate the caste itself, and revolutionize all our political 
affairs ! 

If this be not an " order of nobility," in what particulars 
does the definition of the thing consist ? Comparing the 
facts of the case with the definitions of our lexicographers, 
what else can we make of those facts than the veritable 
original existences, of which the zvords of the Constitution 
are the expression! By all intelligible apprehension or con- 
struction of language, does it not appear that the provision 
of the Constitution which inhibits the States from granting 
any " titles of nobility," is identical in meaning with that 
other provision which enjoins on the States " a republican 
form of government," and that both are equivalent to a pro- 
hibition of slavery ? 

It avails nothing to say thftt, in many particulars the " pe- 
culiar" institution differs from the aristocracies of the old 
world. The aristocracies of Europe differ as much from 
those of Asia, as those of the American States do from both. 
The aristocracy of France differs from that of Venice, and 
both of them from that of Russia. The present aristocracy 



CHAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 73 

of Great Britain differs from that of its own ancient feudal- 
ism. But all are, alike, aristocracies, nevertheless. An 
order of "nobility" precisely upon the model either of the 
ancient feudal or modern European States, could not have 
been established in the American States, and a constitutional 
prohibition to that specific point would have been without 
meaning ; as much so as it would have been to have prohib- 
ited the establishment of the Hindoo castes, or the patri- 
archal arrangements of Melchizedck's time. Instead of this • 
the Const ; t uion selects a generic term, that includes all the 
different species. The comparison of our American "nobil- 
ity" with those of other nations and ages, would be a curi- 
ous and an intricate one. In some particulars, the one might 
have a fair claim for the preference, and in other respects, 
the other. As a whole, it would be difficult to select a more 
odious, a more mischievous, a more anti-republican one than 
the American — none, certainly, so wicked, so cruel, so inhu- 
man, so degrading, so demoralizing. In the comparison 
with it, the system of feudalism, which in some respects, it 
strikingly resembles, and to which it is often compared by 
its friends, was magnanimous and manly. That was found 
ed on the spirit of military adventure — this, upon cupidity 
and meanness. The "chivalry'' 1 to which our American 
nobility of woman-whippers lay claim (thereby asserting 
their prerogatives as feudal chieftains or barons) \s aquali'y 
which the semi-barbarous " nobility" of ancient Europe re- 
ally possessed. They did not drive a n?farious traffic in the 
sinews and souls of their own children. They did not sell 
infants at auction by the pound. The serf was attached to 
the soil, but he was not an article of commerce, a chattel 
personal. The peasantry were not degraded by the i-ica- 
pacity to contract marriage, to live in the family relation, to 
possess some articles of property, and even to hold lands 
under a certain tenure and for services rendered. And they 
freely uttered their thoughts. If degraded, the serf Avas a 
degraded man, and not a mere thing. He was not mana- 
cled and driven to his daily task by a driver. So far from 
being prohibited to bear arms, one of his avocations was 
that of a soldier; he was relied upon for his country's de- 
fence instead of being guarded by a patrol — the main tie 
that bound him to his master, was his relation as a soldier, 
to his chieftain, (whose family name he sometimes bore,) and 
to his "clan,' 1 in whose fame and triumphs he had a share. 
The feudal system, therefore, as a political arrangement, did 
little to degrade the masses under the heel of a caste, in the 
comparison with the slave system. If it degraded industrv, 



74 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

it was not so much because it made labor the badge of ser- 
vility, as because it inspired those who should be laborers 
with the ambition of military renown. Such a system would 
less violently and rudely clash with the aims and arrange- 
ments of a free republic than the slave system. In other 
words it would be less aristocratic, would establish an order 
of" nobility" of a mitigated character, less obnoxious to the 
charge of subverting the liberties of the people. 

* " Serf. A servant or slave employed in husbandry, in some countries 
attached to the soil and transferred with it.'-' — Webster's Dictionary. 

" Villein, or villain. In feudal law is one who holds lands by a base 
or servile tenure, or in villenagc." — lb. 

" Villanage, or villenagc. 1. The state of a villain; base servitude. 
2. A base tenure of lands; tenure on condition of doing the meanest ser- 
vices for the lord." — 26. 

" Feudalism. The feudal system; the principal and constitution of 
feuds, or lands held by military services." — lb. 

The feudal "chief" or " chieftain" was the commander 
or head of a troop of serfs — or over a " clan" composed of 
such. " Chieftainship, or chieftainry" was " the government 
over a clan." — Vide Webster. The feudal chiefs were 
sometimes called "barons" and the word baron, according 
to Webster, is " a title of nobility." The States are in- 
hibited, by the Consti'ution, from granting "titles of nobil- 
ity." A "serf" is a sort of " slave," and his master is a 
"lord." 

Can any one doubt that the adoption of the feudal system, 
by one of the States, would be a breach of this provision of 
the Constitution ? And if so, by what construction of the 
language employed, can we make it appear that the still 
more despotic and aristocratic system of American servitude 
is not also a breach of that same provision? If the lesser 
would be, why not the greater? 

A comparison'of our American "nobility" with that of 
civilized modern Europe; and of American slaves, with Eu- 
ropean peasantry, would exhibit contrasts still more striking. 
The distinction now existing between nobles and common- 
ally in England, in the comparison with the ancient distinc- 
tion between barons and serfs, has almost melted away ! 
How manifestly then do our American slaveholders consti- 
tute a more despotic specimen of "nobility" than the nobil- 
ity of Europe ! 

The only remaining question is, whether this provision of 
our Constitution retains any meaning, and if so, what that 
meaning can be ? If it can not protect us from the most 
unmitigated of all aristocracies, from the most absolute and 
irresponsible of all orders of " nobility," from what aristoc- 



CHAP. II. — STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 75 

racies, or from what order of nobility can it protect us? 
And how can it. do this ? 

"War." "No State," (says the Constitution,) shall 
11 keep troops in time of p£ace, or engage in tvar, unless ac- 
tually invaded," &c, &c. 

(( Civil War. A war between people of the same State or city."— 
Webster. 

Have the States a right to make war upon " one-half" of 
their own " citizens ?'"' Are the slave States, as a matter cf 
fact, in a state of war? If they are, what has become of the 
constitutional provision that forbids it ? If they are not, by 
what authority, under the Federal Constitution, do they 
keep up their "armed troops," their military "patrols" 
"in time of peace?" What right have they to authorize the 
scouring of the country by armed troops with rifles, pistols, 
and other military weapons, (to say nothingof blood-hounds,) 
to hunt down and shoot, without judge or jury, a portion of 
the people, Tor no fault, but a desire to " secure for them- 
selves anfl their posterity, the blessings of liberty?" What 
right have they to pass " acts of outlawry" against the la- 
boring people, for no crime but refusing to labor without 
wages, or for the misdemeanor of visiting their husbands 
and wives, their children or parents, or seeking a residence 
with them? Have the States a right, under the Federal 
Constitution, to wield military force for objects like these? 
If they have, what is the meaning of the constitutional inhi- 
bition just quoted? And by what rules of interpretation 
shall that provision be so construed as to prohibit any other 
species of war, or any other State arrangements for main- 
taining armed forces in time of peace? In another connec- 
tion we have shown that the "suppression of insurrection," 
and the "execution of the laws," do not call for any milita- 
ry demonstrations, nor authorize them, in such cases as those 
now under review. 

Another constitutional provision requires a moment's at- 
tention in this place. 

"The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and 
immunities of CITIZENS, in the several States."— Article IV., Section 2, 
Clause 1. 

But many of the "citizens" in some of the States, are 
free people of color. They are recognized as citizens by 
the Constitutions and Laws of the States wherein they re- 
side. Large numbers of them are legal voters and vote at 
Presidential as well as State elections. They are eligible, 
and are sometimes elected to office. A colored man has 
been a member of the legislature of Massachusetts. 



76 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

Now the laws of all, or nearly all the slave States, or the 
regulations and ordinances of cities within those States and 
under State authority, are in direct violation of the above 
provision of the Constitution, so far as free citizens of color 
are concerned. They can not visit the slave States without 
being subjected to violations of their rights as citizens, by 
the public authorities of those States. If they visit the 
Southern seaports in coasting vessels, as seamen, they are 
seized and put in prison for safe keeping, till the vessel is 
ready to depart. This is a fact of common and general oc- 
currence, and if the colored citizens were ship-masters, su- 
percargoes, or ship-owners, the law would equally apply to 
them. Any such citizen of a free State, visiting a slave 
State, is liable to be seized on suspicion of being a fugitive 
from slavery, thrust into jail, and unless able, (under such 
disadvantages,) to make satisfactory proof of his freedom, 
sold into perpetual slavery, attainting his posterity forever, 
under the great Southern "bill of attainder,"* FOR THE 
PAYMENT OF HIS JAIL FEES! [Strang to tell, the 
laws and the usages of the Federal District itself, under 
" exclusive legislation of Congress," and under its eye, con- 
forms to this general law of slavery in the States, on the plea 
that comity to the States requires it, and that in no other 
way can " the peculiar institution" be preserved !] Thus 
complete are the triumphs of the slave power over the plain- 
est and most pointed prohibitions of the Federal Constitu- 
tion. 

The time would fail to point out all the ways in which 
the rights of white citizens of the free States secured under 
this clause, are violated by the action of the slave States. 
At this moment, there are thousands and tens of thousands 
of citizens of trie free States including many of their most 
estimable inhabitants, and not a few gentlemen of literary 
distinction and high station, ministeis of the gospel and 
statesmen, who can not, with safety to their persons, visit 
large portions of the slave States. In some of those States 
they would encounter enactments for the capital punishment 
of those who should have spoken or written against slavery. 
In none of them, perhaps, would they be secure of protection 
from the summary vengeance of "Lynch law" — and in 
some cases, they would be dependent for that protection, on 
the State authorities that had demanded of Northern Gov- 
ernors the delivery into their own power of white Northern 
citizens, to be tried under slave laws, for the crime of writ- 
ing, even in a free State, against slavery — authorities too, 
that had demanded Northern legislation against freedom of 



CHAP. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 77 

speech and of the press — authorities that had offered large 
rewards for the felonious abduction, in the free States where 
they resided, of free white citizens, for the same crime of 
writing against slavery ! 

Is any more evidence needed, that this constitutional pro- 
vision is, with impunity, violated, and made of none effect, 
by the action of the slave States?"" 

And all this, be it remembered, is in harmonious keeping 
with the common and prevailing expositions "f the Constitu- 
tion which make it a " guaranty" of slavery or a " compro- 
mise" with it, and therefore a crime or a misdemeanor for any 
subject of the Constitution to oppose slavery, the sacred 
object of constitutional protection ! 

The " Summing up." 

1. In this chapter we have examined, upon the principles 
of "strict construction," those provisions of the Constitution 
that have been held to involve a " guaranty" of slavery, or 
its tolerance by "compromise," and we claim that, on those 
principles, no such guaranty or compromise can be proved. 

2. On the same principles, we have considered other por- 
tions of the Constitution, which we claim to have proved in- 
consistent with the existence of slavery in the States, and 
to require and authorize its abolition, by the Federal author- 
ities, judicial and legislative. 

Let the supposition now be made, .for the argument's 
sake, that we have failed to prove what we claim to have 
proved, under this second head. It might still be true that 
no "guaranty" or" compromise" in favor of slavery, on the 
principles of strict construction, could be proved. This 
would leave the " peculiar" institution without the benefit 
of a national guaranty or even a corn-promise, in its favor. 
And from that circumstance we could deduce an argument 
not very different in its practical results from the one now 
reached. Remove from slavery the support it derives from 
the Federal Government, and it speedily falls. And besides, 
in the absence of. any guaranty or compromise in its favor, 
what consideration of justice or policy could forbid the Fed- 
eral Government to. abolish it? 

* Since our first edition was published, a still further illustration Ins been 
furnished, showing that the circumstance of color furnishes na l arrier nor ex- 
ception to the usurpations of the slave power. The Statp of Massachosi 
through her Legislature and Executive, eommhsinns one of her most distin 
guished and venerable citizens, Hon. Samvfl Horn, to visit South Carolina. f< r 
the purpose of acting as attorney on behalf of colored citizens of Massachusetts, 
illegally imprisoned in that State, with a view of testing} in the Federal Court*, 
the constitutionality of the State laws of South Carolina, authorizing such im- 
prisonments; — whereupon the Governor and Legislature of South Carolina 
promptly and unceremoniously cxyel the authorized agent of Massachusetts 
;rom their State ! 



78 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

We will now vary the supposition a little. Let it be as- 
sumed for a moment, that the Constitution, by the principle 
of * strict construction" has been found to conflict with itself 
— that while on the one hand, it contains some provisions in 
favor of slavery, on the other hand, it contains some provi- 
sions against it. Not a few have believed this to be the fact, 
and they have been puzzled and perplexed with the sup- 
posed phenomenon, and have solicitously asked how such a 
Constitution could be administered. Others have supposed 
that each feature and provision of it, whether for, or against 
slavery, was to be carried into effect, in its place, however 
conflicting in their results ! On this point we have a thought 
or two to suggest. 

" Strict construction" has nothing to do with the task of 
reconciling inconsistencies and contradictions in a written 
document. It can only expound its several parts by the help 
of its grammar, its lexicon, and the current use of the terms 
and phrases, according to the accredited literature within 
its reach. When it has done this, its functions are fulfilled. 
It is neither a legislative, nor yet an executive power. It is 
simply judicial, and its judgment is guided exclusively by 
one rule, namely, the dead letter of the words. It can not, 
like other tribunals, inquire after the spirit — the main scope, 
the grand design of the instrument, and make its minuter 
details bend into consistency wiih that, or give way to it. 
If the Constitution by the strict letter, has provided for the 
establishment of justice and the robbing of hen-roosts — if it 
has enjoined the preservation of liberty for ourselves and 
posterity, and the seizure and enslavement of every sixth 
man, woman, and child among us, if it has made it the duty 
of Congress to provide for the general defence, and to con- 
vert one-half our citizens into enemies, if it has guarantied 
a republican form of government and has guarantied the 
perpetuity of a ruling oligarchy, if it requires us to guard 
the President's house from all danger, and to put five tons 
of Dupont's best gunpowder under it, and light the dry 
match that leads to it, " strict construction" with due gravity 
and composure records it all, and reads off its record with- 
out a stammer or a changed muscle. That is its verdict. 

But what shall the executive power do with it? Do? 
Why do nothing at all, of course, until impossibilities cease 
to be such. Let it rob the hen-roosts, according to law, and 
by judgment of Court, but take care to do it only when, and 
as it can be done, according to law, that is, in accordance 
with "justice!" Let it seize and chattelize its prescribed 
proportion of our citizens, only taking care to do it in such 



CHAT. II. STRICT CONSTRUCTION. 79 

a manner as to " secure the liberty" of all our citizens, and 
M their posterity" — let it convert one half its citizens in one 
half of the States into enemies, but in such a way as to 
" promote the general welfare, and provide for the common 
defence" — let it " guaranty" or tolerate by M compromise" a 
ruling- oligarchy of 250,000 men to control seventeen mil- 
lions, whenever it can be done in consistency with a " repub- 
lican form of government," and without any " bills of attain- 
der" or laws "impairing the obligation of contracts" by the 
authorities of the States. And let it blow up the President's 
house with gunpowder, whenever it can be done with per- 
fect safety to that edifice ! This is all that " strict con- 
struction" can award, or authorize to be done, so far as the 
" peculiar" claim is concerned, and for the plain reason that 
one provision of the Constitution is as precious in its eyes as 
another, and each must stand valid upon the independent 
power of its own immaculate ivords and syllables ! 

For illustration's sake, let the slave power stand before 
the Court, in the person of Shakspeare's relentless Jew, 
Shylock, demanding his pound of flesh, from the Christian 
merchant of Venice, to be cut out of his very vitals, " accord- 
ing to the bond!" The plea was a "strict construction" 
plea, and the Court was a "strict construction" Court. The 
sentence accordingly had to be rendered in favor of the 
plaintiff! The pound of flesh was his " due" and he might 
cut it out where he pleased ! "A Daniel come to judgment!" 
triumphantly exclaims the revengeful Jew, as he whets his 
murderous knife for the slaughter " according to law!" But 
hold! rejoins the Judge. " One -pound" is the judgment of 
the Court "according to the bond." At your peril, cut not 
a fraction less or more ! And again. Another statute, says 
the Judge, provides that if a Jew do shed one drop of Chris- 
tian blood, his life shall pay the forfeit ! At this the Jew 
lets drop his knife, and offers to withdraw his claim and 
leave the Court. But hold ! again, exclaims the " strict 
construction" Judge. Another law provides that if a Jew 
conspi?-es against the life of a Christian, that Jew shall die, 
and his estate be confiscated unto the State of Venice! 
Thou, Shylock, hast conspired, in open Court, against this 
Christian's life, and now the sentence of this law must rest 
upon thee! ""A Daniel come to judgment" — a thousand 
voices respond. " A Daniel come to judgment! I thank 
thee, Jew, for teaching me that word!" 

If "strict construction" could award to slavery what it 
claims under the Constitution of 17S7-9, the return of fugi- 
tive slaves, the apportionment of representation upon the 



80 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

basis of slavery, the twenty years' tolerance of the African 
slave-trade, the quelling of refractory slaves by the national 
arm, the "reserved rights of the States" to fatten upon their 
pound of human flesh " according to the bond" — of what 
earthly avail could be the verdict in favor of those claims, 
so long as it must accompany another verdict, affirming the 
right and the duty of the Federal Government to "establish 
justice," " secure the blessings of liberty" and " provide for 
the common defence?" 

We may understand, by this time, the result, (not to say 
here, the absurdity,) of supposing the Constitution to contain 
provisions in favorof slavery, and provisions to " secure the 
blessings of liberty." If it be so, and if "strict construc- 
tion" must thus determine, why then, it must determine in 
effect — for it must follow — that the constitutional provisions 
in favor of slavery can be of no benefit to the claimants. 
The verdict they may have, and welcome. But the uses for 
which the verdict was sought, can not be reached, so long 
as the other — the conflicting provisions of the Constitution 
remain. 

In no way then, can any available verdict in favor of the 
slave claim, be obtained, but by making it appear that all 
the provisions of the Constitution are in harmony with the 
slave system ; that while some of them are distinctly in its 
favor, none of them are decidedly against it. But this 
can not, with any show of decency, be pretended. And of 
course, the "peculiar" claim falls to the ground, even if it 
were so, that the argument of this chapter had not been 
fully sustained — which we do not admit. 

Returning from this digressive supposition, (which we 
have made for the benefit of those who are inclined to split 
in two, with their convenient beetle-and-wedges arbitra- 
ment, every disputed question,) we insist that in the Court 
of " strict construction" the Constitution of 17S7-9 has 
been found to contain no guaranties or compromises in favor 
of slaver)', but a number of explicit provisions against it, 
fully authorizing the exercise of the Federal Power for its 
overthrow. We are now ready to meet the " peculiar" 
claim at that other tribunal to which it has our leave to ap- 
peal. In our next chapter we shall see whether " the spirit 
of the Constitution" is more favorable to slavery than its 
letter. 



CHAP. III. SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 81 

CHAPTER III. 

"SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION." 

The Constitution of 1787-9. Considered in the light of 
its spirit, its objects, its purposes, its principles, its aims. 

1. Preliminaries — ''Spirit of the Constitution'' defined — Its province 
and authority as a rule of construction — An obvious but neglected dis- 
tinction. 2. Spirit of the Constitution as manifested by the instrument 
itself— by its Preamble— by its grant of powers — by its construction of 
the Federal Government — by its care of personal rights — by its provi- 
sions hostile to slavery — Spirit of the Preamble — Spirit of the powers 
conferred — Structure of the Federal Government — Security of personal 
rights — Provisions hostile to slavery — Affinity with Common Law — Spe- 
cimens of Common Law — Its power. 3. Spirit of the Constitution, as 
attested by History, by civilians, and jurists — Extent of the National 
Power. 4. The Constitution construed— The " spirit of the Constitu- 
tion" on the wool-sack. 5. Special pleadings, their fallacy. 

SECTION I. 

PRELIMINARIES. 

There are but two different methods or rules of construc- 
tion, by which the meaning of a written document, like our 
Constitution, may be interpreted and explained. The one 
refers us to the letter — the other to the spirit. Having at- 
tended to the former, we come now to the latter. We open 
our eyes upon a wider field, and a more attractive one. A 
few particulars must be premised, and " the rules of the 
Court" understood. We are to try the cause by another set 
of maxims, now. 

1. The language of the Constitution is not to be excluded 
from the present inquiry, though it is not exclusively to be 
depended upon, as it was at the lower Court. At the pre- 
sent Court, the words used in the document, are admitted 
as witnesses, but other witnesses are admitted along with 
them. 

2. The prevailing spirit, the general scope, the leading 
design, the paramount object, the obvious purpose of the 
instrument, constitute the first, the chief point of attention. 
If anv minor objects, collateral interests, incidental details, 
local designs, temporary arrangements, or doubtful and dis- 
puted provisions present themselves, all these are to be 
grouped together, as constituting secondary topics of inquiry. 

3. The latter or secondary class, are in the next place, to 
be disposed of, in the light of the former, or primary : are 

6 



82 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

to be construed in such a manner as not to conflict with, or 
thwart them, or else they must be set aside, as inexplicable, 
impracticable, contradictory, or suicidal. Otherwise, very 
manifestly, (in case of discrepancies, and contradictions, to 
which all the written instruments of fallible men are sub- 
ject) there will be to be witnessed, the sacrifice of the pre- 
vailing spirit and paramount objects of the instrument to 
petty interests and absurd details, or else we shall be obliged 
to see the Constitution stultified by its palpable self contra- 
dictions and impracticabilities, precisely as (under a similar 
supposition) upon the principles of "strict construction" we 
hare already seen done. 

In other words, we should be driven back again, to that 
same Court of "strict construction" whose'verdict and judg- 
ment we have already obtained, or to no construction, at all. 
For the very notion of " const ructiori" supposes that some- 
thing needs to be explained and determined, that had seemed 
anomalous, obscure, or doubtful. Construction, moreover 
must proceed by some rule. And to say that the " spirit of 
the Constitution" — in distinction from its dead letter, must 
furnish that rule of construction, is the same thing as to say 
that the spirit of the Constitution must control and govern 
that construction, so that every thing apparently conflicting 
with the spirit of the Constitution must either be so under- 
stood as to agree with it, or else be set aside to give place 
for it. To demur against this would be to appeal from the 
11 spirit of the Constitution" to something else. And if 
neither the letter nor the spirit of the Constitution can guide 
us, it becomes a nullity. 

4. In determining either the general spirit of any written 
instrument, or the meaning and intent of its particular de- 
tails and specific provisions, a distinction is to be preserved 
between the spirit, design, or intentions of the principal 
party or parties interested in the document, who sign and 
seal it for ratification, as being their own act, and the spirit, 
design and intent of the persons employed to draft, and pre- 
pare such an instrument, including, (it may be) the spirit, 
design and intent of a minority of the persons concerned, 
acting with the draftsmen, in distinction from the main body 
concerned. The design of the former instead of the latter 
is the main thing to be ascertained. The testimony of the 
latter to the designs of the former, is to pass for what it is 
worth, in connection with other testimony, and no more. 

Thus, in a will, the main thing is the design of the testa- 
tor : — this is not to be confounded with the design of the 
penman of the will, closeted with a few of the heirs. The 



CHAP. III. SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 83 

design of the parties to a written agreement, (or the main 
body of them, where large numbers are concerned,) is to be 
held quite distinct from the designs of the men employed to 
draw up the paper, in connection with a few others- who 
may be near them. And " We, the people of the United 
States ," who adopted the Constitution, and whose act and 
instrument it is, are not bound to concede that our design, 
in adopting and maintaining it, was, of necessity, identical 
with what may be proved to have been the design of the 
persons, or a portion of the persons, we employed to prepare 
it for us. What the Convention of 17S7, or a portion of it, 
inte?ided to effect by the Constitution, is not to be confounded 
with the designs, especially the paramount object of THE 
PEOPLE toko adopted it. The objects of the Convention, 
or members of it, may deserve our attention, and their testi- 
mony to the spirit of their times, may command respect. 
But their intentions are not to be substituted for the inten- 
tions of THE PEOPLE, or confounded with them. Nor are 
the intentions of a mere fraction, an oligarchy of the peo- 
ple, to pass for those of the people themselves. 

With these needful memoranda, to prevent our confound- 
ing things that are radically distinct from each other, or put- 
ting them in places where they do not belong, we proceed 
to our inquiries. 

But how shall the "spirit of the Constitution" be ascer- 
tained? — First, by an inspection of the document itself: — 
second, by such external evidences as may present them- 
selves. 

SECTION II. 

The " Spirit" manifested by the Instrument itself. 

4 'Even a child is known by his doings." The spirit and 
temper of every man is apparent in his deportment and 
methods. The implements invented by men reveal the 
spirit in which they were conceived and framed, by the 
general purposes, whether of utility or of mischief, that they 
were evidently adapted to subserve. No one need mistake 
a plough for a military weapon, nor a " field piece" for an 
utensil of husbandry. The spirit and design of every piece 
of machinery is indicated by its form and structure. It may 
be perverted to unsuitable purposes, though made with a 
wise and benevolent design, and it may bear marks of hav- 
ing been wrenched and injured bv the absurd process. By 
these common sense rules, let the "spirit of the Constitu- 
tion" be tested. \ 



84 



AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 



" Spirit" of the Preamble. 



The strict Utter of the Preamble has been examined, and 
found hostile to slavery. And wheiein can its "spirit" be 
distinguished from its letter? If in any thing it is in this : 
that the " spirit" of the paragraph, is, if possible, still more 
emphatically and unmistakably belligerent in its aspect, 
against slavery and imperative in its demands for its over- 
throw. If the claimant of constitutional slavery, in the 
Court of "strict construction," should have adventured to 
perk himself upon technicalities, and demand that "slavery" 
and its "abolition" should have been distinctly specified by 
name in the Preamble, in order to have made out a warrant 
for the congressional abrogation of the slave laws of the 
States, there can be no room for any suggestion of the 
kind, here. We are not at the Court of " strict construction" 
now, nor trammelled by its narrow rules. We rise from 
the letter to the spirit — from the mere words, to their fullest 
comprehension and extent. We recognize here, in addition 
to the mere language, the spirit that evidently breathes 
through that language, and moves and refreshes our inmost 
souls. We claim that the "-spirit of the Constitution" 
speaking through this Preamble declares, for itself its high 
aims and intents ; that it speaks out in the authoritative 
voice oflaiv; — that it utters no rhetorical nourish : no cant- 
ing profession. We claim that each and every specification 
in the Preamble, is a definite provision of the " spirit of 
the Constitution" as truly so as the clauses that tell how 
the judges of the Federal Court shall be appointed, and the 
votes cast for President and Vice-President. We claim 
that " the spirit of the Constitution" enjoins on the govern- 
ment it creates and defines, such legislative, judicial, and 
executive action, as shall truly and effectually " form a more 
perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquil- 
ity, provide for the common defence, promote the general 
welfare, and secure the blessingsof liberty to ourselves and 
our posterity." And no one doubts that this would include 
the abolition of slavery. Whoever may carp and cavil about 
technicalities and words, no one with "the spirit" of a man 
in him will deny that " the spirit" of this Preamble requires 
of the Government created by it, the overthrow of slavery 
among "the People of the United States." 

" Spirit" of the Powers conferred. 

And this is still further proved by the ample powers be- 
stowed upon Congress, to carry the declared objects and 
provisions of the Constitution into effect — to " make all laws 



CHAP. III. SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 85 

necessary and proper" for that purpose. — [Art. I. Sec. 8, 
Clause 17.] Had tl.e " spirit" of the Constitution even ap- 
parently failed to clothe the. Government of its creation, the 
instrument of its high purposes, with the requisite powers to 
do the things declared to be the main object of the Consti- 
tution, there might have been some apparent ground for a 
doubt. But certainly there can be no rational or magnani- 
mous doubt, now. When a parent charges a child with the 
transaction of a certain piece of business, declaring with 
precision and emphasis, the main objects he wishes to have 
him "secure?*- and. then actually puts into his hands all the 
needed implements for the task, including his own well ex- 
ecuted power of attorney authorizing him to act in that pre- 
cise direction, what candid man could doubt that the " spirit" 
of that parent and of his instructions was sufficiently reveal- 
ed by these acts? The Constitution, as the parent of the 
Federal Government, has directly and explicitly declared 
the main work and business of that Government, in the spe- 
cifications of the Preamble. < The., in the clause above cited, 
the parent puts into the hands of the child his " power of 
attorney" fully vesting him with power to do the work de- 
scribed. How preposterous, after all] this, to doubt, either 
ihe legal authority of the child to do the very errand he was 
sent upon, or the "spirit" of the parent's instructions! 

If the positive and unequivocal declaration, by the Con- 
stitution, of its MAIN OBJECT in establishing the Federal 
Government, can not be understood to be binding, what part 
of the Constitution can be held to be binding? And if that 
declaration of its main object, thus connected with the ex- 
plicit grant of the poivers necessary for its accomplishment, 
can not reveal the "spirit of the Constitution," in what pos- 
sible way could it be revealed ? 

To say that it should have been revealed by the technical 
terms "slavery" and "abolition" would be the same as to 
say that the Constitution should have been a statute book. 
It would be saving, in effect, that the "spirit of the Consti- 
tution" can reveal to us nothing, and that we must go back 
to the dead letter and to " strict construction" for all our light 
on the subject ! More than all this, it would be to deny that 
e ,r en strict construction could guide us — for the words " slave- 
rv" and its " abolition" are neither more plain nor emphatic, 
than the words injustice and justice, and a "strict construc- 
tion" of the former could not be more explicit than a strict 
construction of the latter. 

Men may say, if they please, that the letter of the New- 
Testament, does not abolish slavery, though such a statement 



86 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

would not evince a very minute or extensive acquaintance 
with the poiver of human language, the meaning of words. 
But very few are so hardened or obtuse as to deny that the 
"spirit" of the New Testament abolishes slavery. It is 
scarcely less evident that the "spirit" of the Federal Con- 
stitution abolishes slavery, or at least, authorizes and re- 
quires the Federal Government to do so. 

" Spirit of the Constitution," As revealed in the struc- 
ture of the Federal Government. 

The "spirit" of every Constitution of civil government 
is indicated by the very frame-work of the government it 
creates or authorizes. The " spirit" of the French Consti- 
tution is seen in the French Government. The " spirit" of 
the British Constitution is seen in the distinctive features of 
the British Government. If the "spirit" or any Constitu- 
tion of government be monarchical, the government will be 
essentially monarchical. If the " spirit" of the Constitution 
be aristocratic, the structure of the government will be aris- 
tocratic. If the " spirit" of the Constitution be democratic, 
the form of the government will be democratic. And if the 
"spirit" of the Constitution partake of a mixture of these 
three elements, the form of government will exhibit a like 
mixture. If the " spirit" of any Constitution bte " pro-sla- 
very," that spirit too, will be revealed in the structure of 
the govermnent. Let the " spirit" of the Constitution be 
tested by this rule. 

In what particular does the structure of the Federal Gov- 
ernment betray the pro-slavery "spirit" of the Constitution 
that gave birth to it? Wherein docs it establish, or even 
recognize that "peculiar" caste that now claims its sanction 
and its guaranty? In what part of the instrument do you 
find any mention, either of slavery, or of slaves — of " ivhite" 
citizens, or " people of color ?" In a former chapter we have 
shown that not even the condition exclusively, or distinc- 
tively of the slave, is described in the clause commonly 
cited for that purpose. 

No distinction of color, or of race, or parentage, is speci- 
fied in the Constitution, among the qualifications, either of 
voters under the Constitution for the highest officers of the 
Government, nor among the qualifications of the officers 
themselves. There is nothing in the Constitution that pre- 
vents negroes from voting for President, Vice-President, and 
members of Congress, on the same level with white citizens, 
and in many of the States, they do vote for those officers. 
There is nothing in the Constitution that disqualifies a negro 



CHAP. III. SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 87 

from holding any office under the Federal Government, from 
the highest to the lowest, civil, military, legislative, judi- 
ciary, or executive. A negro may be constitutionally ap- 
pointed Chief Justice of the United States, or Minister Plen- 
ipotentiary to any foreign Court. If the people of any con- 
gressional district in this Union should choose a negro to 
represent them in the House of Representatives of the Uni- 
ted States, he would be constitutionally entitled to a seat 
there. If the legislature of any State \n this Union should 
select a negro to represent the State' in the Senate of the 
United States, the Federal Constitution secures him a sea 
there, on an equal footing with a Webster, a Clay, or a Cal 
houn. And if the People of the United States or a major 
ity of them, (the majority of the people of the thirteen non 
slaveholding States, for example) should choose a full blood 
ed American born negro, to be President of the United 
States, he would be the constitutional President, holding 
the same station and wielding the same powers held and 
wielded by a Washington, a Jefferson, or a Madison. 

This feature of the Constitution is the more remarkable 
on account of its agreement with the Articles of Confedera- 
tion that preceded it, and especially when ii is remembered 
that in the Congress of 1778, in which those Articles were 
framed, a motion was unsuccessfully made to amend the 
phrase "free inhabitants" by inserting between them the 
word "white" — thus deliberately settling the question that 
the CASTE of COLOR should have NO PLACE nor re- 
cognition in the National " Compact." And we have no 
account of any attempt in the Federal Convention of 1787, 
to engraft upon the new Constitution, the contrary principle. 

Thus absolutely certain is it that the " Spirit of the 
Constitution" is the spirit of human equality, directly and 
specifically hostile to the spirit of caste, especially to a caste 
founded on the circumstance of color, of blood, of race, or of 
descent. Contrast this " spirit of the Constitution" with that 
other spirit that cries out "amalgamation" at every attempt 
t) make the State Constitutions, even in the non-slavehold- 
:ng States, correspond with the Constitution of the United 
States in this respect. Then say whether the M spirit of the 
Constitution" be not identical, in this vital particular, with 
i hat spirit of thorough "abolition" that is denominated the 
'spirit of fanaticism" and the "spirit of amalgamation" 
now ! 

Who does not intuitively know that if a " guaranty" of 
-lavery, or a " compromise" with it were to have been in- 
.roduced into the Constitution of the United States, one of 



y» AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

the most essential points, one of the most ready expedients 
(and the one least calculated to meet with effective opposi- 
tion) would have been the introduction of the word " white" 
among the qualifications of voters and officers? If even this 
could not be attempted, with a hope of success, what could? 
Who does not know that one of the highest and most diffi- 
cult points of attainment, even in an "ultra modern aboli- 
tionist," a point proverbially difficult to be reached, is the 
point of harmonious affinity with the "spirit of the Consti- 
tution," as thus revealed? 

The "spirit of the Constitution" utterly abjures the caste 
it self upon which the whole slave system is based, takes the 
despised negro by the hand, and seats him indiscriminately 
around the ballot box among his paler brethren, and holds 
out before him, to incite his manly emulation, the highest 
summits of official station in her power to bestow, the high- 
est seats in the National Government itself. And are we to 
be told that this same "spirit of the Constitution" has 
"guarantied" the perpetual degradation and chattelhood of 
the colored man — that it authorizes the hunting of him, 
through all the States in the Union, "without due process of 
law" * or jury trial, as though he were a wild beast, or a 
noxious reptile ? Did ever effrontery itself, before, adven- 
ture to urge such a claim as this ? 

With the feature of the Constitution just noticed, the 
whole structure and organic framework of the Federal Go- 
vernment agrees, and without that feature that structure 
could not be what it confessedly is, and what it is the pride of 
every intelligent and high minded American to represent it, 
— a free Government — founded on the supremacy of the 
people, the exclusion of monopolies, the annihilation of 
privileged orders, and the absence of caste. 

The same "spirit of the Constitution" that puts the color- 
ed man upon a level with the white, disdaining even an al- 
lusion to any distinction between them, is the spirit that is 
manifested' in its speaking in the name of THE PEOPLE, 
(the whole of them, not a favored class) its derivation of the 
govern ment from the people, the election of the officers of 
the government, either directly or indirectly, by the people 
— the accountability of the highest officers to them, inclu- 
ding the liability of the President himself to impeachment 
and trial, the provisions for frequently returning elections, 
t he general eligibility of the people to office, without dis- 

* This one inhibition of the Constitution, by the bye, is enough to settle the 
unconstitutionality of the Act of Congress of IT93, and of the late decision of 
the Uuiled Stales Court in the e;ise of Prigg vs. Pennsylvania. 



CHAP. III. SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 99 

tinction of caste — the reservation to the people (either di- 
rectly or through their State Governments) of all the pow- 
ers not delegated in the Constitution itself. These features 
of the Federal Government, the glory and the boast of every 
American, can not be separated from the feature that con- 
stitutes the same government the unalterable and uncoror 
promising enemy of the cord of caste, and consequently of 
that abominable slave system with which that caste is 
identified, and by which it is created and preserved. 

If the '"' spirit of the Constitution" has provided for us " a 
republican form of government," then that ".spirit of the 
Constitution" has entered into no " compromise" with 
slavery, and, so far from providing for any " guaranty" of 
slavery, has "guarantied to every State in this Union a re- 
publican form of government" by the definition and on the 
model of the Federal Government itself, a definition and a 
model that places the black man on an equality with the 
white. 

Before dismissing this topic, it may be proper to notice 
one fact, in the structure of the Federal Government, that 
has been claimed as being friendly to slavery. The appor- 
tionment of direct taxes and representation has been consid- 
ered in the light of an arrangement granting an undue share 
of political power to the slave States, giving them an ad- 
vantage over the rest, and thus holding out as it were, a 
premium to slavery over freedom. But the abolition of 
slavery by the slave States would greatly increase their po- 
litical power, as they might then make citizens of all that 
class of their population, of whom they can now reckon only 
three-fifths, but might then reckon the whole. So that the 
present reduced rate of three-fifths instead of the whole, has 
been regarded, by some, as a rebuke and discouragement of 
slavery, instead of a premium bid in its favor. 

This question, we have no occasion to discuss, now. We 
need not deny that the arrangement is unequal, in its bear- 
inor on the free labor States, that its operation gives the 
slave States more power than they ought to possess, and 
that that power is wielded in support of slavery. But from 
this it does not follow that " the spirit of the Constitution" 
contemplated this result, or could look upon it with favor. 
The results of particular business arrangements and details, 
are often the opposite of those contemplated and intended 
by those who enter into them. No one, at that time, sup- 
posed that slavery could continue to the present period, and 
its perpetuity could not have been the object of that provi- 
sion. Could it even be proved that such was the design of 



90 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

some in the Convention, who succeeded in shaping the 
clause to their liking, it would not follow that a majority of 
the Convention adopted it with that view. And if they did, 
it would not follow that THE PEOPLE (including those of 
the North,) for whom the paper was drafted, and who 
adopted it, understood and approved it, in that light, or for 
such an object. We are litigating before a.Couit, now, that 
can look beyond the mere tvords, to the " spirit" and intent. 
And it would require strong evidence to prove that the ma- 
jority of the people intended to put themselves under the 
control of the petty oligarchy that now rules them ! Or if 
it were so, the " sober second thought" of their famous 
" amendments" for the better security of freedom, cuts off 
whatever of a pro-slavery character might be detected in this 
clause of the original instrument. 

And waiving even all this, we might cut the matter short 
by a dilemma that may serve to silence the claim under this 
clause. This provision either harmonizes with all the other 
features that characterize the structure of the Federal Gov- 
ernment, or it does not. If it does, it can not be claimed as 
a "guaranty" or even a " compromise" in favor of slavery. 
If it does not, why then it becomes an excresence, an anoma- 
ly ; and this isolated, obscure, and litigated clause, has to 
be disposed of; (like other incongruities) in the light of those 
outstanding, unambiguous, unmistakable features, by which 
"the spirit of the Constitution" is to be ascertained. This 
is the very process of construction or interpretation, by the 
" spirit of the Constitution;" for this very purpose, we are 
now in Court, and shall proceed to cite other evidences in 
proof that the " spirit of the Constitution" is what we claim 
it to be. 

" Spirit of the Constitution " in its care of 
tersonal rights. 

The spirit of any Constitution of civil government is net 
more clearly discerned in the structure and form it gives to 
the government itself, than in the bearing of its provisions 
upon the security and sanctity of individual, personal rights. 
Here lies the pith and the "spirit" of civil government, after 
all. A iiovernment is good or bad, free or despotic, accord- 
ingly as its provisions are adapted, either to protect and to 
secure the rights of individual human beings, (especially 
those most in need of protection) or, on the other hand, to 
invade and trample upon those rights, or leave them inse- 
cure, or wink at the existence of abuses, usages, laws, and 



CHAP. III. SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 91 

customs, by which those rights are taken away, denied or 
impaired. 

Now slavery, as it exists in the American slave States, is 
the most perfect possible specimen of a system, upheld by 
government, in which all the rights of its victims are tram- 
pled down and denied, and the liberties of all others made 
insecure. 

To learn then, whether the " spirit of the Constitution" 
is a spirit that can enter into a "compromise" with slavery, 
or " guaranty" its existence, we have only to learn by its 
provisions what value it places upon individual security — 
personal rights. 

And here, we might cite again, the specifications of the 
Preamble, if it would not seem a repetition to do so. But 
there are minuter provisions in the instrument, that we must 
not overlook — provisions utterly at war, both in their letter 
and their spirit, with the usages that constitute slavery and 
that are requisite to sustain it. 

The Constitution of the United States guaranties those 
inestimable and inalienable rights of conscience which sla- 
very wholly denies its victims and can not afford to secure 
— does not permit to be exercised — by any portion of the 
citizens in those States where it bears sway. [Amend- 
ments, Article 1.] 

The Constitution provides for " the freedom of speech and 
of the press." [Amendments, Article 1.] But freedom of 
speech and of the press are not only prohibited to slaves, but 
to all who plead their cause, or disseminate the fundamen- 
tal principles of human rights. Tim is done on the express 
ground, and for the known and admitted reason that slavery 
can not exist where those rights are thus exercised and 
maintained. 

The Constitution expressly recognizes " the right of the 
people" (without distinction of caste or color,) '-peaceably 
to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of 
their grievances," [Amendments, Article 1.] But not only 
the slave Slates, but the Congress of the United States, 
have directly and explicitly denied the right of slaves (the 
mass of the laboring people in half the States) to petition 
Congress, they have virtually and practically denied the 
right of petition to al! who petition for the abolition of sla- 
very, and this has led, in one memorable instance, (the 
short session of 1841,) to the suspension of the right of pe- 
tition, in all citizens, and on all subjects, upon the good 
pleasure of the President, as indicated in the topics of his 
Message ! All this has been done on the assumption of the 



92 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

correctness of those prevalent Constitutional expositions that 
make the Federal Government the patron and the servant 
of the slave power. But since the " spirit" and letter of 
the Constitution are grossly and manifestly outraged by 
these proceeding?, we have abundant evidence that the 
" spirit of the Constitution" and the spirit of slavery are an- 
tagonisms that can never be reconciled.* 

We must remember here, that these constitutional provi- 
sions for the security of personal freedom, are contained in 
the first article of the Amendments, and we must bear in 
mind that amend ments exert a corrective and repealing pow- 
er over all the provisions of the original instrument which 
may be found to conflict with them. But all the specifica- 
tions that have ever been claimed as being favorable to sla- 
very are contained in the original instrument, and not in 
the Amendments. So that if the Constitution as formed by 
the Convention of 1787, failed to breathe the " spirit" of 
security to personal rights, and of consequent hostility to 
slavery, yet the PEOPLE afterwards took care to infuse 
that " spirit" into the organic law of their Federal Govern- 
ment, through their Amendments. 

On the same high vantage ground as " Amendments," 



* la further corroboration of the fact that the commonly prevalent construc- 
tions of the Constitution lie at the bottom of all these assaults, in high places, 
not only upon the right of petition, hut upon the right to assemble peaceably 
for that purpose, and to discuss public measures, as well as the freedom of 
speech and of the press, we make a few citations from the speeches, &c, of the 
constitutional expositors, so confidently relied upon. 

"Discussion implies deliberation, deliberation is preliminary to action. The 
People of the North have no risht to act upon the subject of southern slavery, and 
therefore THEY HAVE NO RIGHT TO DELIBERATE— NO RIGHT TO DIS- 
CUSS."— Clay's Speech, 1837. 

Fresh evidence that the prevalent expositions of the Constitution can not, with 
safety be received by a free People! The late President Harrison, in his fa- 
mous speech at Vincennes, May 25, 1835, and approvingly referred to, in his 
letter to James Lyons, June 1, 1S40, as containing the sentiments he still held, 
goes into the argument at length. He first assumes that the Constitution pro- 
vides lor the return of fugitive slaves, &c. fee. He then adds : 

" Now can any one believe that the instrument which contains provisions of 
this kind," &c. &c, " should, at the same time, authorize (the citizens of non- 
slaveholdinu States) to assemble together, to pass resolutions and adopt addresses, 
not only to encourage the slaves to leave their masters, but to cut their throats 
before they do so. 1 insist that if the citizens of the non-slaveholding States 
can avail themselves of the article of the Constitution which prohibits'the re- 
striction of speech or the press to PUBLISH ANY thing injurious to the rights 
of the slaveholding States, that they can go to the extreme I have mentioned, 
and effect anything further that writing and speaking could effect. But, fel- 
low-citizens, these are rcoMhe principles of the Constitution. Am I wrong m 
applying the term unconstitutional to the measures of the emancipators?" 

Gov. Marcy, of New York, and Gov. Everett, of Massachusetts, in their mes- 
sages to the Legislatures of those States, took similar ground, suggesting the 
propriety of suppressing anti-slavery meetings and publications by law. Such 
are the conclusions deduced from the premises of a constitutional "compact," 
" compromise" and " guaranty" of slavery. The security of American liberty 
rests in the fact that the premises are unsound. Not even the gigantic powers, 
of John Quincy Adams have yet sufficed to restore the right of petition, while 
such constitutional expositions prevail. The rights of petition, free speech, 
.mil free press, would indeed be strange and incredible anomalies, in a govern- 
ment pledged to tolerate and even to sustain slavery ! 



CHAP III. SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 93 

overtopping and overlooking, with a supervisor}' eye, each 
and every o?ie of the provisions claimed as " guaranties" or 
"compromises," by the slave power, we find likewise the 
provisions, forbidding the deprivation of life, liberty, or pro- 
perty, in the case of any " person" " without due process of 
law," (Amendments, Article 5,) securing "in all criminal 
prosecutions," the "right" of the accused to "a speedy and 
public trial by jury," &c. &c, (Amendments, Article 6,) se- 
curing the same right of jury trial "in suits at Common Law. 
when the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars," 
(Amendments, Article 7,) the inhibitions of " excessive bail 
— excessive fines — cruel and unusual punishments," 
(Amendments, Article S,) t v e recognition of rights in the 
People, not particularly enumerated in the Constitution, 
(Amendments, Article 9,) the reservation to the People, (di- 
rectly or through the States,) of powers not delegated to the 
United States, by the Constitution. Is there any thing 
doubtful or ambiguous in the "spirit" of constitutional pro- 
visions like these ? Or does that " spirit" harmonize wi h 
such constitutional expositions as we find embodied in the 
absurd enactment of 1793, and the still more preposterous 
decision of the Supreme Court, in the case of Prigg versus 
Pennsylvania? Had the "spirit" prevailed, in that Con- 
gress and in that Court, which could not permit the hazard, 
to a citizen, of the loss of " twenty dollars," in a litigation, in 
a Court of law, without a jury trial, would the civilized 
world have been astounded with th>> spectacle of a profess- 
edly free nation, not one citizen of whom is held legally 
free from a seizure of his person by any individual slave- 
holder "without due process of law," and the reduction of 
him to a chattel personal for life, with the " attainder of 
blood" in his posterity forever, and all this without benefit 
of a jury trial? And without the " ieserved right" 
either of " the People" or " of the State,"* to interpose the 
protection of an act providing, in such cases, a trial by jury ? 
What says "the spirit of the Constitution" to questions like 
these? 

There is another authoritative AMENDMENT of the Con. 
stitution sufficient, of itself, to annihilate whatever of the 
poison of a pro-slavery "compromise" or "guaranty" — 



* "The reserved rights of the States" are magnified into prodigies when 
the right of the slave States to chattelize American citizens, and to send their 
biped blood hounds into every free Sta e, to kidnap them, is to be maintained ! 
But the "reserved rights of the States" amount to nolhing at all, when the 
rights of the free States to protect their own citizens (by " jury trial, by ha- 
beas corpus," by " due process of law,") against unlawful seizures are to be 
judicially put down ! Thus must it needs be, so long as the present constitu- 
tional expositions obtain. A pro-slavery Constitution could do nothing less 



94 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

more or less virulent — might have been ambiguously smoth" 
ered into the original " compact." In the multiplicity o* 
our constitutional weapons against slavery, we had over" 
looked it while before the Court of " strict construction," in 
our second chapter. But we must give it place, now. 

"The right of the PEOPLE to be SECURE in their PERSONS, 
houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches anil SEIZURES, 
shall not be violated ; and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable 
cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the 
p ace to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." — Amend- 
ments, Article 4. 

Whether construed by " strict construction" or standing 
in its own light, as a specimen of the "spirit" of the Con- 
stitution itself, no provision could be more significant and 
conclusive than this. Had it been penned with the special 
design to prevent and forever foreclose and annul any su^h 
legislation as the act of Congress of 1793, or to brand with 
the stamp of unfaithfulness to the Constitution such a judi- 
cial decision as that of the United States Court, in the case 
of Prigg vs. Pennsylvania, what could have been penned, 
more to the point I " The People" and no particular caste 
of them are to be thus secured from " unreasonable seiz- 
ures." Yot the Act of Congress, and the judicial decision, 
leaves no class of the people "secure" from the most "unrea- 
sonable" and felonious "seizures" without even the formal- 
ity of any "warrant" at all, in which a description of " the 
place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized" 
could be introduced. 

To the same purport, as indicative of the " spirit of the 
Constitution" in its care of individual rights, we may cite 
some further provisions of the original instrument itself. 
" The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be 
suspended, unless when, in cases of rebellion or invasion, 
the public safety may require it." (Art. I., Sec. 9, Clause 
2.) But no " privilege of the writ of habeas corpus" <r any 
thing else comes to the benefit of any one suspected of the 
crime of having descended from a slave mother or of any 
person, man, woman, or child, white or colored, whom any 
slaveholder may choose and presume {without presentment 
of jury, or writ of magistrate) to claim and to seize as his 
slate ! This, in substance, is the decision of the Supreme 
Court of the United States, under the Act of Congress of 
1793 ; and the decision and the Act are both based upon 
the common construction of the provision in the United 
States Constitution, (Art. 4, Sect. 2, Clause 3,) concern- 
ing " persons held to service and labor." In our Chapter 
II. we have shown that the words of this provision, on the 



CHAF. III. — SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 95 

principles of "strict construction" furnish no warrant for 
such an Act of Congress — for such a decision of Court. 
Appeal has accordingly been made to the " spirit of thk 
Constitution" — forsooth! to reverse the decision! And 
what has " the spirit of the Constitution" to say, on this 
question? How is it ? When the kidnapper of the South, 
with his bull dogs, (biped or quadruped,) come prowling 
around our Northern villages and hamlets, is it a "case of 
rebellion or invasion" if we refuse to submit to them, or 
even if we trap them or trip up their heels? Does the 
"public safety require" us to be dragged away, without in- 
dictment, or " due process of law" and sent to the Southern 
rice-swamps without a jury, and without u the privilege of 
the writ of habeas corpus ?" Does " the spirit of the Consti- 
tiMion" agree with this ? If it does, let the People under- 
stand, that thev may appreciate its benefits! If it does not, 
let the " spirit" of the Constitution" be better understood, 
and no longer identified with the spirit of legalized Lynch 
law, and made by decision of the Supreme Court, the stand- 
ing commission of the man-thief, setting all the sacred 
guaranties and safeguards of personal liberty at defiance ! 

"The trial of all crimes except in case of impeachment, shall be by 
jury, and such trial shall be held in the State where the said crimes shall 
have been committed," be— Article III, Sec. 2, Clause 3. 

" Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war 
against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and com- 
fort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on testimony of two 
witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open Court."— Art. 
HI., Sec. 3, Clause 1. 

The " trial bv jury" is here recognized, in the original 
instrument itself. And treason is to be defined and punish- 
ed by the most liberal and lenient rules. What a contrast 
to the sanguinary and summary codes of slavery ! Exposi- 
tors of the Constitution who make it a "compromise" or a 
" guarant\ " of slavery, have gravely defined " treason" to 
consist in freedom of speech and of the press directed against 
slavery, or in discussion of its character! At every point, 
" th\ spirit of the Constitution" and " the spirit of slavery" 
come in harsh collision. Who can conceive of the very 
"spirit of this Constitution" making a "compact," a "com- 
promise" with slavery— taking it by the hand—making ami- 
cable terms with it-^and signing a " guaranty* • of the invio- 
lability, the perpetuity of its Lynch legislation— its enacted 
abrogation of all law— its annihilation of the same rights 
that the " spirit of the Constitution" was so solicitous to pro- 
tect? No marvel that those who can quote the "spirit of 
the Constitution" in favor of slavery, can likewise quote 



96 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

the spirit of the Saviour's golden rule, for the same pur- 
pose ! 

" Spirit" of Constitutional Provisions hostile to 
Slavery. 

Full justice to " the spirit of the Constitution' 1 '' as exhibi- 
ted by the distinguishing characteristics of its fundamental 
provisions, could not be done without referring distinctly to 
those provisions which we have a right to claim as being-, 
both in their letter and spirit directly levelled against the 
specific things wherein slavery consists, and providing for 
their removal : — referring, likewise, to those specific grants, 
to Congress, of the Constitutional powers by means of what 
that particular category of evils may be removed. 

Under this head we might class some of the provision&of 
the Constitution already adverted to, particularly the provi- 
sion, (Amendmenls, Art. 5.) that " No person shall be depri- 
ved of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law," 
and likewise Amendments, Art. 4. Scarcely less signifi- 
cant, in their bearing upon slavery, are the guaranties of the 
rights of conscience, freedom of speech and of the press, &c. 
But we allude now, more especially, to the guaranty, to 
every State in the Union, of a republican form of govern- 
ment, the restrictions of State power inhibiting orders of 
nobility, oligarchies, impairing the obligation of contracts, 
laws of attainder, State wars, troops in time of peace, and 
withholding the immunities of citizens from citizens of other 
States: connected as these provisions are with the confer- 
ring of ample powers upon Congress for regulating both 
foreign and domestic commerce, including the commerce in 
slaves, exclusive legis'atiori over the Federal District, the 
needful regulation and government of Territories, power to 
carry out all the provisions and objects of the Constitution, 
but no power to establish or to maintain slavery in District, 
Territory, or elsewhere. Of the "spirit" manifested in 
these provisions there can be no rational doubt. 

It may be objected, perhaps, to our citing these provisions 
in proof of the anti-slavery spirit of the Constitution, that 
some of them are among the disputed points for the proper 
construction of which we are seeking, in the "spirit of the 
Constitution" (when ascertained) an umpire. So that we 
must not admit them as witnesses in a case wherein they 
themselves are to be tried. Be it so, then, that these fea- 
tures of the Constitution are to be put on trial before the 
Court, and, as parties concerned, must not be witnesses in 
their own cause. Having a case at Court, they have an 



CHAP. III. — SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 97 

undoubted right to appear there, and in their own proper 
names and habiliments. If the bare announcement of their 
names, the cut of their garments, their countenances, form, 
gait, -and shibboleth of speech, should reveal to the Court 
and jury their affinity with the " spirit of the Constitution" 
and dissimilarity from the spirit of slavery, why — there is 
no help for that. The old fables may represent Justice as 
being blindfold, but Judges and jurors, in this Court, are 
permittedjto have eyes. 

The Spirit of the Constitution is the Spirit of tiii: 
Common Law. 

Another internal evidence that the " spirit of the Consti- 
tution" is the spirit of Liberty, in other words, the spirit of 
uncompromising hostility to slavery, is to be found in the 
fact that it is identical in its character and arrangements, 
with the " spirit" of the Common Law, in the presence and 
at the touch of which, slavery instantly expires. 

We will, first, establish the fact that the "spirit of the 
Constitution" is identical with the spirit of the Common Law, 
and, then, the fact that the Common Law never tolerates, 
for a single moment, or under any conceivablecircumstances, 
thn existence of slavery. 

* The Common Law is the grand element of the United States Consti- 
tution. All its fundamental provisions are instinct with its spirit; an<1 
its existence, principles, and paramount authority, are presupposed 
and assumed throughout the whole. The Preamble of the Constitution 
plants the standard of the Common Law immovably on its foreground: — 

" « We, the People of the United States, in order to establish jus- 
tice, &c, do ordain and establish this Constitution.' thus proclaiming 
devotion to justice, as the controlling motive in the organization of 
the Government, and its secure establishment the chief end of its aims. 
By this most solemn recognition, the Common Law, that grand legal 
embodiment of ' justice,' and fundamental right — was made the ground 
work of the Constitution, and intrenched behind its strong munitions. 
The second clause of Sect. 9, Art. 1 ; Sec. 4, Art. 2, and the last clause 
of Sect. 2, Art. 3, with Articles 7, 8, 9. and 13, of the Amendments, are 
also express recognitions of the Common LAWas the presiding genius 
of the Constitution." — Weld's Power of Congress, $c. page 13. 

M Who needs be told that slavery makes war unon the principles of 
the Declaration of Independence and the spirit of the Constitution, and 
that these and the principles of Com mon Law gravitate towards each 
other with irrepressible affinities, and mingle into one { The Common 
Late came here with our pilgrim fathers-, it was their birthright, their 
panoply, their glory, and their song of rejoicing in the house of their 
pilgrimage. It covered them in the day of their calamity, and their 
trust was under the shadow of its wings. From the first settlement of 
the country, the genius of our institutions and our national spirit have 
claimed it as a common possession, and exulted in it with a common 
pride- A century ago, Gov. Pown all, one of the most eminent consti- 
tutional jurists of colonial times, said of the Common Law—' In all the 
colonies, the Common Law is received as the foundation and main body 
of their laws.' In the Declaration of Rights made by the Continental 
Congress, at its first session, in '7L there was the following resolution : 

7 



9S AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LA7V. 

c Resolved, that the respective colonics are entitled to the Common Law 
of England, and especially to the great and inestimable privilege of being- 
tried by their peers of the vicinage according to the course of that law.' 
Soon after the organization of the General Government, Chief Justice- 
Ellsworth, in one of his decisions, upon the bench of the United States 
Supreme Court, said, *-the Common Law of this country remains* the same 
as before the revolution.' Chief Justice Marshall, in his decision in the 
case of Livingston vs. Jefferson, said, c When our ancestors came to 
America, they brought with them the Common Law of their native 
country, so far as it was applicable to their new situation,, and I do not 
conceive that the revolution in any degree changed the relations of marc 
toman, or the law which regulates them. In breaking our political 
connection with the parent State, we did not break our connection with 
each other.' [Hall's Law Journal, iVett? Series.] Mr. Duponeeau, in his- 
'Dissertation on the Jurisdiction of Courts, in the United States,' says, 'I 
consider the Common Law of England, the jus commune of the United 
States. I think I can lay it down as a correct principle, that the Com- 
mon Law of England, as it was- at the time of the Declaration of In- 
dependence, siill continues to be the national law of this c.'Ustxy, 
so far as it is applicable to our present state, end subject to the modifi- 
cations it has reci ve I here, in the course of half a century .' Chief J ustice 
Taylor of North Carolina, in his decision in the case of the State vs.. 
Reed, in 1823, Hawk's N. C. Reps. 454, says, 'a law of PARAMOUNT 
OBLIGATION To THE STATUTE was violated by the offence— 
COMMON LAW, founded on the LAW OF NATURE, and confirmed 
by REVELATION.' The legislation of the United States abounds in 
recognitions of the principles of the Common Law, asserting their para- 
mount binding power. Sparing details, of which our national State papers 
are full, we illustrate by a single instance. It was made a tammUon 
of the admission of Louisiana into the Union, that the right of trial by 
jury should be secured to all her citizens — the United States Government 
thus employing its power to enlarge the jurisdiction of the Common 
Law as its great representative."* — WeltPs Power of Congnss, Sfc^ 
page 14. 

Having thus identified the "spirit of the Constitution," 
and (along with it) the "spirit" of American Juris- 
prudence, with the "spirit" of the Common Law, we will 
now look at the bearing of this spirit of the Common Law 
upon the American Slave System. 

Specimens of Common Law. 

14 The Common Law knows no slaves. Its principles annihilate 
slavery wherever they touch it. It isa universal, unconditional, abolition 
act. The declaration of Lord Chief Justice Holt, that, 'by the Com- 
mon Law no man can have property in another,' is an acknow- 
ledged axiom, and based upon the well known Common Law definition 
of property, viz : ' The subjects of dominion or property are things, as 
contra distinguished from persons.' "— Jb. page 13. 

The following are also among the maxims of the Com- 
mon Law : 

F' The law favors liberty." — Wood's Inst. Book 1, chap. 1, page 25. — 
Coke's 1st Inst. Book 12 4, and 2d Inst. 42, 115. 

" The law favoreth a man's person before his possessions." — Noyes' 
Maxims, pages 6 and 7. 

« Whenever the question of liberty seems doubtful, the decision must 
be in favor of liberty."— Digest Lib. 20, Tit. 17, Leg. 20. 

* Another fact, conclusive of the illegality of slavery in Louisiana, for this 
was equivalent to a condition that she should abolish slavery. In this parti- 
cular, at all events, Congress seems to have recognised its right and duty to 
secure to Louisiana, "a republican form of government."— Author. 



CHAP. III. SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 99 

" The law therefore which supports slavery and opposes liberty, must 
necessarily be condemned as cruel, for every feeling of human nature 
advocates liberty. Slavery is introduced through human wickedness, 
but God advocates liberty, by the nature which he has given to man. 
Wherefore, liberty torn from man, always seeks to return to him, and it 
is the same with every thing which is deprived of its native freedom. 
On this account it is, that the man who does not favor liberty, must always 
be regarded as unjust and cruel; and hence the English law always 
favors liberty." — Chancellor Fortescue, de laudibus legum. chap. 42, 
page 101. 

" Law favoreth liberty and dower. Law regards the person above 
his possessions — life andliberty, most.^—Principia Lcgis ct Equitatis. p 56. 

" Those rights which God and nature have established, and which are 
therefore called natural rights, such as life and LIBERTY, need not the 
aid of human laws, to be more effectually vested in EVERY MAN, 4han 
they are. Neither do they receive any additional strength, when de- 
clared by the municipal laws, to be inviolable. On the contrary, NO 
HUMAN LEGISLATION HAS POWER TO ABRIDGE OR DESTROY 
THEM, unless the owner shall himself commit some act, that amounts 
to forfeiture.'' — Introduction, Sect. 2. 

"The law of nature, being coeval with mankind, and dictated by God 
himself, is of course superior in obligation to any otter. It is binding 
overall the globe, in all countries, and at all times. No human laws 
have any VALIDITY, if contrary to this, and such of them as are 
valid, derive all their force, and all their authority, mediately or im- 
mediately, from this original." — lb. 

" The inferior law must give place to the superior— man's laws to 
God's laws." — Noycs- Maxims. If therefore any statute be enacted, con- 
trary to these, it ought to be considered of no authority in the laws 
of England." 

"Usage and custom, generally received, have the force of law." — 
Hale's History of Common Law, p. 65. ''Because custom, derived from 
a certain reasonable cause, takes the place of law." — Littleton Lib. 2, 10. 
Sect. 149. 

'< But when custom is adopted without reason, it ought rather to be 
called usurpation than custom." "Because, in judging of customt, 
strength of reason is to be considered, and not length of time. The reason 
which supports them ought to be regarded, and not the length of time, 
during which they have prevailed." 

" Two incidents are indispensable to validity of custom or usage. 1st. 
A reasonable commencement, (for all customs or prescriptions which are 
against reason are void.) 2d. Continuance without interruption."— 2d 
Inst. p. 140. 

"Evil customs ought to be abolished."— Littleton 2d Inst. 2, chap. 2, p. 
141. On whieh Sir Edward Coke remarks, that " every use (or custom) 
is evil, which is against reason." 

" V\ here the foundation is weak, the structure falls."— Nones' Maxims, 
p. 5. " What is invalid from the beginning, can not be made valid by 
length of time." — lb. p. 4. , 

" The reasonableness of law is the soul of the law.— Jcnhs. Cevt. 15. 

" This law is written upon the heart of every man, teaching him what 
to choose and what to refuse. What is written by reason in the heart, 
can not be effaced: neither is it liable to change, either from place or 
time, but ought to be preserved every where, by all men. For the 
laws of nature are immutable; and the reason of their immutability is 
this, that they have for their foundation, the nature of things, which i« 
always and every where the same." — Doct. § Stud. p. 2. 

"Against these, there is no prescription, or statute, or csage; 
and should any be enacted, they WOULD NOT BE STATUTES, or 
usages, but corrupt customs." — lb. p. 5. 

"If any human law shall allow or require us to commit it [murder, 
mentioned by way of illustration,] we are bound to transgress that 
human law, or else we must offend both the natural, and the divine." — 
Blackstone. 



100 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

° If it be found that a former decision (respecting a point in Common- 
Law,) is manifestly absurd and unjust, it is declared, not that such a 
sentence was bad law, but that it is not law.'- — lb. 

"It is generally laid dawn that Acts of Parliament, contrary to reason? 
are void." — lb. 

"Prof. Christian, the distinguished annotator of Judge Blackstone, 
decides that a Judge ought to resign his office, rather than allow himself 
to be the organ of the execution of an iniquitous law." 

" Derived power can not be superior to the power from which it is 
derived." — Noycs* Maxims, p. 3. 

** The lawful power is from God alone, but the power of wrong is from 
the devil and not from God; and whose soever work a king shall do, /its 
servant he is, whose work he does. Wherefore, when he does justice, 
he is the minister of the Eternal king, but when he does unrighteousness, 
he is the servant of the devil." — Bracton. Lib. 3, Chap. 9, p. 106-7. 

''For he is called a king (a ruler,) for ruling righteously, and not 
because he reigns. Wherefore he is a king, when he governs with 
justice, but a tyrant, when he oppresses the people committed to his 
charge.'* — lb. 

" When an act of Parliament is against common right or reason, or 
repugnant, or impossible to be performed— the common law will control 
it, and adjudge such act to be void."— -S Coke's Reports, 118. 

s * An act of Parliament may be void from its first creation, as an act 
against natural equity— -for jura natura sunt immutabUia — sunt lege$ 
legum~(the laws of nature are immutable — they are the laws of laws.) 
But this must be a very clear case — and judges will strain hard rather than 
interpret an act void, ab initio/' — Hobart's Reports, p. 87. 

See also Bascon's abridgment "Statute," A. Vol.ti, p. 36S. * 

Power of the Common Law. 

The reader will please to understand that he has beers 
perusing extracts, not from the " fanatical" proceedings of 
an anti-slavery Convention, but from the venerated and au- 
thoritative volumes of the Common Law — the same Com- 
mon Law that is so manifestly the basis and ground work 
of all the fundamental provisions of the Constitution of the 
United States : the same Common Law in which every man 
finds the chief guaranty of his rights. If we can understand 
the u spirit" of the Common Lam, we can understand the 
"spirit of the Constitution" by which we are to interpret 
and construe its disputed provisions. How much of a "com- 
promise" or " guaranty" of slavery, "the spirit of the Con- 
stitution" will sanction, the reader can judge. \ 

These p'inciples of the Common Law, being connected 
with the British Constitution as they are with ours, abolish- 
ed slavery in Great Britain, by the decision of Lord Mans- 
field, in the Somerset case, in 1772. Is the thought to be 
admitted, for a moment, that the "spirit of the Constitution'" 

*" Jiid^e McLean of the United States Supreme Court, has also'recently 
decided that statutes against fundamental morality are void. Indeed, no> 
principle of the common law is better settled, or can be supported by higher or 
more numerous authorities." — Christian Freeman, Sept. 19, 1S44. 

f We will likewise ask the reader to study carefully these Common Law 
maxims, to fix them in his memory, and note the page for future reference. We 
shall have occasion to refer to them again, for other purposes than to ascer- 
tain the spirit of the Constitution of l737-!>. They have an independent and 
inherent power, in themselves. 



CHAP. III. SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 10 1 

of the United States is less friendly to liberty, less potent 
for its protection, less hostile to despotism, or less efficient 
for its overthrow — in a word, less republican, than the Con- 
stitution of a limited monarchy, like Great Britain ? Did 
the American Revolution, and the Declaration of Indepen- 
dence retard, or thrust back, the march of human freedom 
and human improvement, instead of urging it forward ? 

The Constitution of the United States, both in its letter 
and its spirit, is moulded and fashioned upon the model of 
the Common Law, and instinct with its life-inspiring spirit, 
throughout. Whereas the Constitution of Great Britain, 
that, in the structure of the government, received its dis- 
tinctive shape and texture before the principles of the Com- 
mon Law began to be distinctly understood, received after- 
wards, into its old stock of monarchical and aristocratic in- 
gredients, but comparatively few grains of the democratic 
principles of the Common Law — yet they proved sufficient 
to leaven the whole lump with the spirit that abolished negro 
slavery, first in the Island itself, and afterwards in its de- 
pendencies, Asiatic and American. By our dismemberment 
from Great Britain, are we then to become less free and se- 
cure than British subjects ? "While " slaves can not breathe, 
in England" nor in her colonies, can freemen find no secu- 
rity in America? Have we fallen so low in the sight of all 
the nations ? 

No ! Thus it can not be. Thus it shall not be. Thus, 
constitutionally, legallv, it IS NOT! Slavery in these 
United States, is sheer usurpation, and abuse, from begin- 
ning to end ; a nuisance, demanding judicial, (not to sa\ 
legislative,) removal. Every slave held in America, is un- 
lawfully held, and in defiance of American Constitutional 
Law. One single consideration is conclusive of the whole 
maMer, and it is simply this : — TheConstitution of the United 
;States, yes! — the Constitution of 1787-9, is identical in its 
spirit with the spirit of the Common Law. It is the legiti- 
mate child, it is the well constructed instrument of the Com- 
mon Law. It is the embodiment of the Common Law, re- 
iffirming its provisions, and constructing and commissioning 
he Federal Government to carry those provisions into ef- 
fect. [To say that it is not this, is to say that it is a mere 
confederacy, and no civil government at all.] And the 
ioomrnon Law, wherever recognized, wherever permitted to 
ouch the statute book, to enter the Court of Justice, or to 
mprint the soil with the sole of her foot, is one uncompro- 
aising and universal act of emancipation and abolition. To 
ay that there can be constitutional slavery in the United 



102 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

States — slavery tolerated by the Constitution — is the same 
thing as to say, that there is Common Law slavery in the 
United States ; an absurdity that r in its own proper form, 
no sane man, perhaps, has ever yet been found to utter. 

Are we traveling beyond the record ? Anticipating a de- 
cision beforehand, while our argument is unfinished ? Well, 
then, let us summon further witnesses. If the chimera of 
constitutional slavery has as many lives as popular tradi- 
tion attributes to another " domestic" animal among us, 
with its stealthy movements and its sharp claws, there are 
weapons enough in reserve, to dispatch it. 

SECTION III. 

11 Spirit of the Constitution" a* attested by History, 

and by eminent civilians and jurists. 

If the shape of the Constitution, its gait, its countenance, 
its air, its sayings, its alliances, its devisings, and its doings, 
have not sufficiently manifested its " spirit," we will now 
call in the aid of witnesses, who are reputed to have stood 
nearer to it, and to know more about it, in its earlier days, 
in its origin, its birth-place, its parentage, its nursing and 
swaddling, than ourselves. 

" The spirit of the Constitution," if sought, out of the in- 
strument itself, and if sought by historical testimony, is to 
be sought in "ike spirit of the age" and nation, in which 
the Constitution was born. The question becomes a question 
of the leading purposes, aims, objects, and principles, that 
gave birth to the Constitution — that preceded it — that de- 
manded it — that brought it into existence. 

To know "the spirit of the Constitution" then, we must 
take a portrait of the " spirit of seventy-six !" If that 
spirit, like the prophet Samuel, is buried out of sight of the 
present generation, and if, " because the Lord has departed 
• from them," and the well recorded words of the seer will 
not suffice them, they must needs demand a vision of the 
"spirit" itself— let them strengthen themselves for the sight, 
lest they " fall straightway all along on the earth, and are 
sore afraid at its words," when it lises before them, like 
" gods ascending out of the earth." It comes ! It comes ! 
•■ An old man covered with a mantle" — its declaration of 
self-evident truths burning from its lips — its right hand, lift- 
ed to heaven, in solemn appeal to " the Supreme Judge of 
the world, for the rectitude of its intentions" — while "in the 
name and by the authority of the good people of these colo- 
nies" — " with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine 
Providence" — "for the support of this declaration," and 



CHAP. III. SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 103 

pledging (on behalf of those people) "their lives, their for- 
tunes, and their sacred honor" — it affirms, (as founded oh 
•"duty" and on " right,") its act of separation from -the peo- 
ple and government of Great Britain; "TO INSTITUTE 
A NEWGOVERNMENT, laying its foundation on such 

PRINCIPLES, AND ORGANIZING ITS POWERS ill SUch FORM" 

as "shall seem most likely" to "secure those rights for 
which governments are instituted among men" — " holding 
these truths to be self-evident, that ALL MEN are created 
EQUAL, that they are endowed by their Creator with cer- 
tain INALIENABLE RIGHTS, among which are life, 
LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness." 

Such is the "spirit of 'seventy-six" Will it be pretended 
that tkat "spirit" was dead and buried, without hope of re- 
surrection, in less than thirteen years after its memorable 
" Declaration ?" Will it be pleaded that " the spirit of the 
Constitution" of 1787-9 is not identical with the »■ spirit of 
seventy-six" — pursuing, in the Declaration and in the Con- 
stitution., one and the same end ? 

Was the solemn pledge of '76 unredeemed, nay, deliber- 
ately broken, by the Constitution of 17S7-9 ? 

Is the " spirit of the Constitution" of 1787-9, the deadly 
antagonism of " the spirit of seventy-six?" This it must be, 
if it either " guaranties" slavery, or holds anv manner of 
"compact" or "compromise" with it? And then, it be- 
comes the deadly enemy of the nation's freedom, instead of 
its servant and protector! 

We have net room to cite a tithe of the concurrent testi- 
mony of that period. We might notice that the "Declara- 
tion of self-evident truths" was likewise a declaration of well 
recognised and oft reiterated truths — that the language of 
that national document was not only the language of tfie 
Common Law, but the language, likewise— almost to plagia- 
rism — of the popular and widely current anti-slavery litera- 
ture of those times. We might cite the anti-slavery pledge 
of the Continental Congress of 1774, the solemn denial, by 
the same Congress, in 177o, that " the Divine Author of our 
existence intended a part of the human race to hold an abso- 
lute property in, and unboiuuhd poicer over others." \\ <> 
might cite the testimony of Mr. Jefferson, in his Notes on 
Virginia, towards the close of the Revolutionary War, that 
the anti-slavery sentiment was gaining ghound "since the 
origin of the'present Revolution" and the way preparing 
" for a total emancipation." We might recite the unit- 
slavery eil'orts, (as well as writings,) of Dr. Rush, John Jay, 
Alexander Hamilton, and Benjamin Franklin, at that period, 



104 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LATT. 

and so onward, during the 'progress of measures for forming 
the present Constitution,* and after its adoption. This, in 
connection with the actual abolition of slavery, and the 
adoption of measures for this end, in a number of the States, 
and the generally expressed belief that these measures were 
about to be extended into all the other States. The acts of 
Congress, already mentioned, just before, and confirmed 
again just after the adoption of the Federal Constitution, 
forever abolishing slavery in the North West Territory, to 
the end that the Territory might be formed into u republi- 
can States and have no slavery," Nor could we well omit 
the "Observations on the American Eevolution," published 
by Congress in 1779 ; containing this declaration ;■ — " The 
great principle (of government) is r and ever will remain in 
force, that all men are by nature free, and so long as we 
have any idea of justice, we must associate that of human 
freedom. It is conceded on all hands, that the right to be free 
can never be alienated,! We might mention too, the 
statement of Judge Wilson, one of the members of the 
Convention that framed the Constitution, which he made 
in the Pennsylvania Convention for its ratification, the same 
year, that the Federal Constitution had " laid ths founda- 
tion for banishing slavery FROM THIS COUNTRY :"— 
and in accordance with this, the anti-sjavery petition of 
Franklin, (another member of the Convention that formed 
the Constitution,) as President of the Pennsylvania Aboli- 
tion Society, praying Congress, in 1790, to " secure the 
blessings of liberty to~the people of the UNITED STATES," 
" without distinction of COLOR. "\ To this we might add 
the declaration of Washington that slavery ought to be abol- 
ished by legislative authority, and that his vote should be 
given for the measure. We might add the testimony, not 
only of Madison, Pinckney, and Jay, but also of Patrick 
Henry, Grayson, Tucker, Wythe, Pendleton, Lee, Blair, 
Mason, Page, Parker, Randolph, Iredell, Spaight, Ramsay, 
Martin, McHenry, Chase, Bayard, Rodney, Rawle, Buchanan, 

•Hamilton and Franklin were members of the Convention that framed the 
Constitution. Rush and Franklin were signers of the Declaration of Indepen- 
dence. 

f Here, by the bye, we have another definition of a "republican form of gov- 
eminent" which we omitted to quote in its proper connection, in our second 
chapter. It furnishes also, a definition of that "justice" which is promised in 
the Preamble of the Constitution, aud affirms (what we shall have occasion to 
insist upon by and by) that the great anti-slavery principle of the^Declaration 
of Independence, is not only '• the spirit of the Constitution" of 1787-9, but 
" will evii ■.■main ir» forci" whether with the concurrence of parchment Con- 
stitutions or without them. 

f. There was no District of Columbia at that time, and no Territory in which 
slavery had not already been abolished by Congress. Very manifestly, then, 
Dr. Franklin petitioned for the abolition of slavery in the States, and by the 
Federal Government which he had assisted in framing— a fact that has been 
aU»ded to, la recent pro-slavery reports im Congress. 



CHAP. III. SriEIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 10-5 

Wilkinson, Pleasants, McLean, Anthony, Bloomfield, Gal- 
loway, Johnson, Dawes, Scott, Gerry, Rice, Brown, Camp- 
bell, &c, &c. A list including the most prominent states- 
men of the South as well as the North, proclaiming before 
the sun, that slavery was a fast waning system, that must 
speedily fall. 

And, what is more,signin>ant than any thing else, so over- 
whelming was this spirit of abolition, during the period 
from 1774 to 1790, 'that the voice of opposition was hushed! 
Luther Martin of Maryland, is reported as having made a 
powerful anti-slavery speech in the Convention that framed 
the Constitution, but it is not on record that a solitary mem- 
ber moved a tongue in reply. So far from there being a 
pro-slavery excitement at the South, every southern mem- 
ber of Congress voted for the abolition of slavery, in the 
North Western Territory, and the public press in Virginia 
was loud in its condemnation of slavery. 

But we must pause. It would require a much larger 
book than the one we are now writing, to present any thins* 
like an adequate expression of the ANTI-SLAVERY 
" SPIRIT OF THE AGE" in which the Federal Consti- 
tution was framed and adopted. About ten pages of Weld's 
"Power of Congres? over the District of Columbia'" — com- 
mencing on page 25, is occupied with a condensed specimen 
of the language of eminent statesmen of that period, on the 
subject, which the reader would do well to examine. 

The evidence is overwhelming, that the prevailing " spirit 
of the age" that produced the Federal Constitution, was an 
anti-slavery spirit, and that this spirit was manifest in the 
leading minds by which the Constitution was projected, and 
adopted as well as framed. The pretence of a "compact" 
— a " compromise" — a u guaranty" in the Consiitution, or 
at the basis of it, in favor of slavery, becomes too absurd 
to be discussed without irony. 

Extent of the National Power. 

The " spirit of the Constitution," in respect to slavery is 
sufficiently apparent. " The spirit of the Constitution" in 
respect to the powers essential to be granted, and intended 
to be conferred, upon the Federal Government, constitutes 
a distinct branch of inquiry, to which we will now turn. 

The letter of the constitutional provisions on this subject, 
we have considered elsewhere, and have found them amply 
sufficient to authorize the abolition of slavery. And what 
reason have we to suppose that the spirit of the Constitu- 
tion, in this respect, is behind the strict letter of its provi- 



106 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

sions ? What is there, in the instrument itself, in the struc- 
ture of the Federal Government it authorizes — what is there 
in the history of the times, what was there, in the wants or 
the wishes of the people, that should indicate that the strict 
letter of the Constitution, in this particular, is not in accord- 
ance with its spirit and design? 

The whole framework of the Federal, Government, as 
detailed in the provisions of the Constitution, including its 
restrictions of State power, reveals to us" the fact that a 
Government, not a Confederation, a Government not merely in 
name but in fact, was intended, was authorized and institu- 
ted, by the instrument containing the organic law of the 
Government, and declaring itself to be " the supreme law of 
the land." And there is no such thing as a civil or political 
government, by the definition of any eminent civilian or 
jurist, that does not possess the power to es'ablish justice, 
secure the blessings of liberty, protect individual rights, and 
"execute judgment between a man and his neighbor." 
"When the laws have declared and enforced all this" — as 
Mr. Jefferson hath it — " they have fulfilled their functions." 
To talk of a civil, or political government that does not pos- 
sess this power, is to talk absurdity, self-contradiction, and 
nonsense. It is to speak of a thing as existing and not ex- 
isting at one and the same time. 

The old "Articles of Confederation" between the States, 
had been entered into, in 1778. This arrangement had 
been found necessary to clothe in a more formal manner, the 
" Continental Congress" with the powers the national exi- 
gencies had been found to need. Until, then, the Declara- 
tion of Independence, establishing the principles and defin- 
ing the objects of the new government, but entering very 
little into details, had constituted, along with the Common 
Law, the only distinctive Constitution of " the United States" 
which that Declaration had affirmed to exist. 

And in these Articles of Confederation, a certain amount 
of " power and jurisdiction" (evident attributes of a civil and 
political government) had been — to use its own words — 
"expressly delegated to the United States hi Congress assem- 
lied" The objecfof these powers was affirmed to be " the 
more convenient management of the general interests of the 
United States." In many important particulars, the powers 
that would have pertained to separate disunited States, (such 
by the bye, as "the United States," described in the Decla- 
ration of Independence that gave birth to them, never were,) 
<;lid not, as a matter of stipulated arrangement, pertain to 
the States under the Confederation. Among other things, 



CHAP. III. SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 107 

they could grant no titlesof nobility, nor keep vessels of war 
or other armed force, in time of peace, nor without leave of 
the United States — neither could they engage in war, unless 
actually invaded — circumstances sufficiently indicative of 
their limited powers, and of the dependence of the indivi- 
dual State upon the Confederacy. Congress, with the con- 
current consent of nine States, &c, &c, were to exercise 
the "sole and exclusive right of determining on peace and 
war." — Were to determine controversies between different 
States, were (exclusively) to receive and send foreign am- 
bassadors, enter into treaties and alliances, manage all affairs 
with the Indians, fix the standards of coins, weights and 
measures, establish post-offices, &c, &c. 

Nevertheless, after the experience of nine years, it was 
found that the powers of Congress were not sufficiently ex- 
tensive to secure to THE PEOPLE the full benefits that a 
NATIONAL GOVERNMENT ought to confer, and the 
Preamble to the present Constitution may afford us some 
hints of those ascertained defects, as may likewise those 
specific provisions in favor of liberty which have already 
been discussed ; particularly the Amendments. Hence, the 
new Constitution was formed. 

It is known that the delegates to the Federal Convention 
came together with various and discordant views of the de- 
gree of power which the National Government should pos- 
sess, and that the proper adjustment of power between the 
State and National Governments, involving the difficult if 
not impracticable problem of reconciling a National Govern- 
ment with the independency of the States, occupied by far 
the greater part of the time of the Convention. This pro- 
blem indeed, along with the connected one, of properly ad- 
justing the relative power of the larger* and the svmllcr 
States (not the Northern and Southern, the slaveholdingor 
the non-slaveholding)t and allaying the rising jealousies be- 
tween them, drew out the greater part of the debates in the 
Convention. And those delegates who came into the Con- 
vention strongly prejudiced and even pledged against the 
conferring of larger powers upon the National Government, 
found either their own views modified by the facts and ar- 



* Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, were then the large States 
whose power was feared. 

t Nearly all the States if not all, were then slaveholding States, Ad not owe 

of them expected long to remain so— a fact that may well account tor the little 
attention paid in the Convention, to that subject, and throwing an air oi th<- 
ridiculous around the grotesque pretension of a " compact — "compromise 
— or " guaranty" on that subject. 



108 



AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 



gumenls adduced in the debate, or else found themselves in 
an inconsiderable minority, at the close of the Convention.* 

We may be certain, then, of two things — first, that the 
words employed in the Constitution were not inadvertently 
used — second, that the powers conferred were not hastilv 
and inconsiderately bestowed. What those powers are, the 
Constitution distinctly states. 

Nor was the Constitution adopted without a public and 
.wide spread agitation and discussion of this very point. 
The adoption of the Constitution was opposed on the ground, 
chiefly, of its too ample bequest of powers to the Federal 
Government, to the detriment or the danger of "State 
Rights." Yet, notwithstanding all this, and although the 
vast abilities and almost unbounded influence of Mr. Jeffer- 
son and his friends were thrown into the scale of opposition, 
yet the overwhelming majority in favor of ratification, (in- 
cluding the mass of those statesmen and of the citizens, who 
afterwards, and on other grounds, rallied round Mr. Jeffer- 
son and elevated him to the highest office in the Govern- 
ment,) very soon decided the question, and such a decree 
of enthusiasm prevailed, that, from that day to this, "few- 
statesmen, however jealous of "State Eights" and fearful of 
the National Power, have adventured to find fault with the 
provisions of the Constitution in this particular. 

And what is still more significant, no class of statesmen, 
not excepting Mr. Jefferson and his particular friends, have 
ever found the constitutional powers of the Federal Govern- 
ment too extensive for their convenience, when charged 
with the administration of the national affairs. In his pur- 
chase of Louisiana, Mr. Jefferson admitted distinctly that he 
exceeded his constitutional powers ; at first he suggested an 
alteration of the Constitution, extending its powers for that 
Durpose, but afterwards consoled himself with the thought 
hat the popular assent to that measure made it as valid as 
i formal change of the Constitution could have done. And 
n his annihilation of all foreign and even coast-wise com- 
merce, by the long embargo, he gave a much larger construc- 
ion to the Federal Power over commerce than the total 
ibolition of the domestic slave-trade (even upon Mr. Clay's 
identification of the slave-trade with slaveholding) would 
equire. Mr. Madison, who once thought the establishment 
Ta National Bunk beyond the constitutional scope of the 

* For the correctness of these statements, we refer to "Secret Proceeding 
nd Debates of the Convention that assembled in Philadelphia, in the year 1797, 
>r the purpose of forming a Constitution of the United States of America, 

om the notes of the late Robert Yates, and copied by John Lansing, Jr., meui- 
:rs of that Convention." Albany, 1821. 



CilAP. III. SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 109 

Federal Power, was afterward.- willing to sec that power used 
for that purpose. And all who assent to the constitutionality 
of protective or prohibitory tariffs, claim a much higher and 
a much more questionable power for the Federal (Govern- 
ment — in the view of any unprejudiced constitutional 
lawyer — than the power of abolishing slavery in the States — 
even allowing- that the specific provisions of the Constitution 
in that direction, should be left out of the argument. 

It remains that we add some citations from approved con- 
stitutional expositors, attesting the powers which "the Spirit" 
and letter of the Constitution confer on the government it 
authorizes and institutes. 

While the question of the adoption of the Federal Con- 
stitution was yet pending, and one of the main objections, 
as already noticed, was the excess of national, in opposition 
to State power, Alexander Hamilton, (who, along with 
Madison and Jay, was explaining and defending the Con- 
stitution in the papers called "The Federalist,") so far from 
concealing or explaining away this feature of the proposed 
Government, avowed and defended it in the bold language 
that follows : 

(< But it is said, that the laws of the Union are to be ' the supreme laic of 
the land.' What inference can be drawn from this — or what would they 
amount to, if they were no? supreme ? It is evident they would amount 
to nothing:. A LAW, by the very moaning of the term, includes supre- 
macy : It is a rule, to which those to whom it is prescribed, are bound 
to observe." — Federalist, No. XXXIII, page 175. 

In the same connection he shows the confusion and anar- 
chy that would ensue if the National Government were 
not to be invested with that supreme and paramount 
authority over the States which the Constitution describes. 
And in another article, setting forth "the defects of the 
present Constitution ' (meaning the then existing Articles 
of Confederation, *) the same writer says, 

" The next most palpable defect of the existing Confederation is th»* 
total want of a Sanction to its laws." — Federalist, No. XXI, page 110. 

In pursuing the subject, the writer among other things, 
makes the following significant suggestion : 

" Who can predict what effect a despotism, established in Mnssnchusett* 
would have upon the liberties of New Hampshire or liliode Island, Con- 
necticut or New York ?" — lb. page 112. 

Sure enough? And who could predict the effects of a 
despotism in Virginia, upon the liberties of Pennsylvania 
and Ohio ? More than Hamilton apprehended, has 

* It will be noticed here, that Hamilton considers the Articles of Confede. 
ration a Constitution , but 'defective" because not conferring sufficient povert- 



110 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

already been realized. But his suggestion furnishes a per- 
tinent comment upon the constitutional power of Congress — 
as construed by " the spirit of the Constitution" — under 
the clause that " guaranties to every State in this Union, a 
republican form of government." Coming as this hint did, 
from a known abolitionist, how happens it that the South 
took no alarm, if the South had then expected to perpetuate 
slavery? Neither this hint, nor his exposition of the supre- 
macy of the Constitution and the laws of Congress appear 
to have had any other effect than he desired, viz : to make 
the Constitution popular with the people, and secure its 
enthusiastic ratification. 

Mr. Madison, one of the most prominent members of the 
Federal Convention, and himself a slaveholder, in a speech 
in the first Congress under the new Constitution, May 13, 
17S9, referring to that contemplated abolition by Congress 
of the African slave-trade, a measure that was then antici- 
pated to be identical, in effect, with the abolition of slavery 
itself, held the language that follows : 

" I should venture to say it is as much for the interests of Georgia and 
South Carolina, as of any State in the Union. Every addition they re- 
ceive to their number of slaves tends to weaken them and renders them 
less capable of self defence. In case of hostilities with foreign nations, 
they will be the means of inviting attack instead of repelling invasion. 
It is a necessary DUTY of the GENERAL GOVERNMENT to 
PROTECT every part of the Empire against DANGER, as well external 
as internal. EVERY THING, therefore, which TENDS to increase 
this danger, though it may be a local affair, yet if it involves National 
Expense OR safety, it becomes a concern to EVERY PART OF THE 
UNION, and is a proper subject for the consideration of those charged with 
the GENERAL ADMINISTRATION of the GOVERNMENT."— Cong. 
Reg. Vol.2, page 310— 11. 

The powers of the Federal Government in general, and 
in particular reference to slavery, according to " the spirit 
of the Constitution" as understood by Mr. Madison, maybe 
gathered from this paragraph with sufficient distinctness. 
What a comment upon the miserable pretence that the North 
has no right to interfere — that there was a " compact," a 
"compromise," an " understanding" — nay. even a " guaran- 
ty," (as some have it) by which the Federal Government is 
precluded from touching the proscribed topic ! Yet who 
can fail to see that Mr. Madison's doctrine is but a fair ex- 
position of the power of Congress to provide for " the general 
defence ?" The " war power of Congress," as insisted on 
by John Quincy Adams, to abolish slavery in the States, is 
evidently but an approximation to the higher doctrine of Mr. 
Madison, as here expressed. And the official statements of 
the late Secretary of the Navy, Mr. Upshur, which no one 
pretends to call in question, may suffice to show that the 



CHAP. III. SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 11.1 

occasion for the prompt exercise of this constitutional power 
to abolish slavery has fully arrived. Even the item of "na- 
tional expense" Mr. Madison makes a sufficient cause for 
such action on the part of the General Government, even 
without the danger of a partial conquest and consequent dis- 
memberment of "the empire." And according to the best 
estimates, the " expence" of the necessary means of defence 
recommended by Mr. Upshur, could not fall short of two 
hundred millions of dollars, to begin with, to say nothing of 
the standing expense, afterwards, (of, say twenty millions 
per annum,) to maintain such a Navy and keep it in repair. 
One of these things, then, the National Government must 
and will, as a matter of fact, do : — either incur this expense, 
or abandon " the general defence" of the country, or M pro- 
vide for the common defence" by the only remaining means 
in its power, the exercise of its constitutional authority for 
the abolition of slavery in the States. 

Among Constitutional Jurists now on the stage, there is 
no one, perhaps, whose opinion would have more weight 
with those who would controvert our positions, than that of 
Judge Story. His participancy in the late decision of the 
Supreme Court in the case of Prigg versus Pennsylvania, 
will relieve him from the suspicion of any undue tendency 
to construe the provisions of the Constitution in favor of abo- 
lition. Let us hear his exposition of the powers of the Gen- 
eral Government: 

"If there be any general principle which is inherent in the very defini- 
tion of Government, and essential to every step of the progress to be made 
by that of the United States, it is, that every power vested in the Govern- 
ment, is, in its nature sovereign, and included by the form of the term, 
the right to employ all the means requisite, and forcibly appli- 
cable to the attainment of the end of such power, unless they are except- 
ed in the Constitution, or are immoral, or are contrary to the essential 
objects of political society."* 

Assuming then, as Judge Story did, in common with oth- 
ers, that certain powers relative to the return of fugitive 
slaves, were vested in the General Government, it is easy 
to see hdw he drew the conclusion that the State Govern- 
ments could not, by any legislative provisions, interfere with 
the exercise of that power. Admitting his premises, the 
conclusion seems sufficiently logical, so long as we have 
any remaining conceptions of a Gocernment of the United 
States. Fresh evidence is here furnished, by the bye, that 
standing on the commonly assumed premises of a constitu- 
tional " compact, compromise or guaranty" in favor of sla- 

*Quoted by Alvan Stewart in his Constitutional Argument, in the "Friend of 
Man," OctoDer 19, 1S37. 



112 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

very, there is no such thing as'avoiding conclusions utterly 
subversive of personal security and general freedom. It is 
high time, then, to examine the premises themselves, and 
to know whether we live under a free government or a des- 
potism. 

But we have made this citation, in this place, for the pur- 
pose of saying that the ample and sovereign powers vested 
in the Government of the United Stales — according to Judge 
Story, — powers in the legitimate exercise of which, (accord- 
ing to the late decision of the Supreme Court) the States 
can not interfere — are powers abundantly sufficient, in such 
an application, to secure the objects of the Preamble of the 
Constitution, and its other manifold provisions in favor of 
"justice" — " liberty" — " general welfare" — " common. de- 
fence," "republican form of government," &c. f &c, and 
against " bills of attainder," " laws impairing the obligation 
of contracts" — " titles of nobility," "unreasonable seizures," 
and deprivation of "liberty, without due process of law." — 
These are "powers vested in the Government" by the letter 
and the spirit of the Constitution, while the " powers" to es- 
tablish slavery, hunt fugitives, kidnap freemen, or authorize 
others to do so, may be sought after, in the instrument, in 
vain. 

All the powers in the Federal Government, therefore, that 
the national abolition of slavery (legislative or judicial) calls 
for or requires, is precisely the same power that Judge Story, 
(in common with Hamilton, Madison and others) describe 
as belonging of necessity, to the Government of the United 
States — powers that Judge Story and the other Judges of 
the Supreme Court have actually used in support of slavery. 
So far as the powers of the Federal Government are concern- 
ed, the only difference between the clearly expressed and 
faithfully administered doctrine of Judge Story, and the 
doctrine contended for, in this chapter, is this: — viz. 1. 
Judge Story (in the case of Priefg vs. Pennsylvania) main- 
tains the supreme authority of National over State legisla- 
tion, in a case where the " power vested in the Goverjiment," 
viz : to seize or authorize the seizure of persons claimed as 
fugitive slaves — is a "power" not described nor specified in 
the Constitution — a power not to be made out by "strict 
construction" and grossly inconsistent with "the spirit" of 
the Constitution itself. 2. Judge Story wields this power 
of the Federal Government in favor of slavery and conse- 
quently against liberty : — we would wield the same federal 
power in favor of liberty and consequently against slavery. 



CHAP. III. SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 113 

Which application of that power will the American people 
prefer ? 

We have already remarked that those most tender of State 
rights and jealous of National power have gone quite as far 
as others in the use of the highest and even questionable 
federal powers. We may now add that the highest stretch 
of federal power has been made in support of slaverv. The 
purchase of Louisiana and the late decision of the Supreme 
Court furnish instances in point. To scruple the use of the 
same powers in favor of the legitimate and highest objects 
of power, that are commonly conceded and wielded in sub- 
version of those objects, is to bring the Government into ill 
odor and contempt. 

It is quite remarkable that the exceptions to the use of su- 
preme national power, laid down by Judge Story, are ex- 
ceptions that should have prevented him from giving his 
sanction to the late decision of the Supreme Court. A right, 
in the Government, to wield power for the enslavement of 
any human being, is a right that, in the nature of things, 
can never exist. Such a right the Constitution does not 
even pretend to confer, and consequently the exercise of such 
an assumed right is "excepted in the Constitution," and its 
exercise is most notoriously and superlatively " immoral" as 
well as "contrary to the essential objects of political society." 
But, on the other hand, the use of the supreme power of 
government "to establish justice" and "secure the blessings 
of liberty" is emphatically the use of it for the very " ends 
of such power" as explicitly specified in the Constitution it- 
self. Of course the Constitution can make no "exception" 
to such use ! No " exception" can be pointed out — no shadow 
of a provision that the ordinary and well known powers of 
civil government to abolish slavery shall not be exercised 
by the° Government of the United Slates.* And the highest 
dictates of " morality"! are fulfilled by such an use of legis- 
lative and judicial power. And with'.ut such an use, "the 

* Another consideration sufficient to show the absurdity of supposing that 
by any " compact" or '< compromise" the National Government was precluded 
from abolishing slavery. No one then questioned the legitimate power (if civil 
government in general, to abolish slavery, and the exercise ol that power to 
that end was the rising fashion of the day, in this country. \el in formine a 
civil government with supreme powers, no restriction was even attempted to 
be made, upon the power of the Government in that direction. Of course, the 
power of the Government, in that particular, is the same with that of other 
governments. The absence of any such restriction proves that no such ' com- 
pact" or "compromise" was made. 

f The re;\der will please to notice this concession of Judge Story (in acord- 
ance with the principles of Common Law) that thp powers of civil government, 
though in their " nature sovereign" are restricted and limited by the principles 
of (< morality," and " the essential objects of political society." W hat becomes 
then, of the law or 1793, and of the late decision of the Supreme Court ? 

8 



114 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

essential objects of political society" can never be at- 
tained, and the Government fails of fulfilling the appropri- 
ate functions of all civil government. 

We claim, then, that the "spirit of the Constitution" is 
the spirit of liberty, the spirit of uncompromising hostility to 
slavery. And we claim that the " spirit of the Constitution" 
amplv confers on the National Government the power to 
" establish justice" — to "secure the blessings of liberty" — 
to " provide for the common defence" — and consequently to 
abolish slavery. 

SECTION IV. 

THE CONSTITUTION CONSTRUED. 

" The Spirit of the Constitution," on the wool-sack. 

To construe the Constitution or any portion or feature of 
it, is to fix, definitely, upon its true meaning, or some par- 
ticular portion or feature of it, and decide what application 
or bearing it has, upon some practical problem, particularly 
under consideration, at the time ; as, for instance, its bear- 
ing on slavery and the action of government, either for its 
support, or its overthrow. 

The " spirit of the Constitution" furnishes the rule by 
which we are to construe its provisions and their application 
and bearing on slavery and its abolition, in the present dis- 
cussion. 

This "spirit of the Constitution" is nothing distinct from 
its general and 'predominant character. 

Everyman is known in the community in which he moves, 
and is designated as having this character or that, accord- 
ingly as such or such traits or qualities are found to predo- 
minate, in him. He is characterized by the qualities that 
are found to prevail in his movements, notwithstanding some 
particular incidents in his history may not seem well to 
harmonize or agree with that character. Just so, a Consti- 
tution of government has its distinctive, its appropriate, its 
predominant character, although some incidental provisions 
may present apparent or even real anomalies, or may be so 
expressed as to appear ambiguous, or come into dispute and 
litigation. 

If a man should die leaving a last will and testament, 
and some of its minuter provisions should seem anomalous, 
obscure, ambiguous, or should come into litigation, the Court 
would try to ascertain, both by an examination of the instru- 
ment itself, and by the well attested character, pursuits, ends, 
objects, partialities, antipathies, attachments, and consan- 



CHAP. III. SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 116 

guinity of the deceased, what the general character, spirit, 
end, aim, object, and scope, of the instrument was, and then, 
in the light of that ascertained spirit and character of the 
instrument, determine what disposition to make of the con- 
troverted point. If, for example, the preamble in the prin- 
cipal item in the will should have consisted in the recital of 
the near affinity, ancient friendship, mutual labors, and in- 
valuable services of one certain Jonathan Smith, well known 
to have been a near relative, a munificent patron, and a 
faithful partner in the business of the testator, declaring the 
said testator's intention, in this instrument, to give him his 
whole real' estate — and if, in a subsequent part of the in- 
strument, after a minute description of the testator's home, 
mansion and principal landed property, it should go on to 
devise and bequeath the whole to a certain person whose 
name was so clumsily or imperfectly (perhaps fraudulently) 
written by the draftsman, as to have given rise to the contest 
whether it were the aforesaid Jonathan Smith or one noto- 
rious felon John Smith, proved in Court to have been a 
deadly enemy of the testator, who was always conspiring 
his ruin, who had often attempted to take his life, and whom 
,the testator, at the very time of making his will, was busily 
intent on bringing to justice — what do you think, candid 
reader, the Court and jury would do with the very modest 
claims of this Mr. John Smith to the mansion and estate of 
the testator? — Settle but that one M delicate question" and 
you have comprised in a nut-shell the very gist and pith of 
the grave constitutional question at issue, before this great 
nation, at this moment. 

The general character and spirit of the Constitution with 
its affinities, its aims, and its plighted promises to liberty 
have been abundantly proved. They stand out in bold re- 
lief, in the fore front of the document itself, and are cor- 
roborated by all the concurrent history of the times in which 
it was written. Not less well attested and notorious is the 
hostile character of the felon slavery, that would have 
strangled " the spirit of the Constitution" — the spirit of sev- 
enty-six, in the cradle ; and that was doomed to the eibbet 
with the same breath that directed the draft of the Consti- 
tution ! Yet now it strides modestly into Court and claims 
the document as a deed of " guaranty" in its own faror ! It 
claims the hearth-stone, the resources, the entire domain of 
its hated rival, pretending to have derived its title from that 
rival's own voluntary bequest, as its beloved and farorite 
heir! And " constitutional lawyers" are found, fee-hungry 
enough to pronounce the claim valid, or long eared enough 



116 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

to puzzle their spectacles over the " perplexing and difficult 
question!" 

One moment, and a brief space, we must devote to details. 

Is it still doubted by any one, whether the clause concern- 
ing "persons held to service and labor" may not possibly 
authorize the seizure and return of fugitive slaves ? Do the 
words of the instrument by any English Dictionary, admit 
of a possible construction to that import ? Was the instru- 
ment clumsily, or artfully, or ambiguously drafted by the 
penmen ? Is it doubtful whether Jonathan Smith or John 
Smith, whether liberty or slavery should have the benefit of 
the disputed provision? Let "the spirit" — the general 
character of the Constitution turn the sc-ile. 

Suppression of "insurrection" — protection against " do- 
mestic violence." What construction shall be put upon these 
disputed terms in the national "will and testament?" Is it 
" insurrection" to refuse to labor without wages ? " Insur- 
rection" to rebel against slavery ? Or are the insurgents 
those who violate that liberty which the Constitution ensures? 
Is it " domestic violence" to run away from women-whippers 
and babe-stealers ? Or even to wrench the manacle and 
thumb-screw out of their hands ? Or, on the other hand, is 
" domestic violence" to be defined by the usages of slavery 
itself — the well-known practices of slaveholders? Who 
shall stand for the lawful heir, the presumptive devisee, the 
legitimate child of the " spirit of the Constitution" — the 
"spirit of seventy-six" — so far as this item of bequest is 
concerned? Shall liberty or shall slavery inherit under 
the " will ?" The litigants are both in Court. The jury 
will please to look at them, and decide. There stands the 
" peculiar" claimant with its driver's lash in its hands — his 
scales, for selling children by the pound, just before him — 
his blood-hounds, for hunting down honest husbands in search 
of their kidnapped and ravished wives, just behind him. 
This is one of the claimants under the bequest ! The other 
is plain Jonathan himself, with his free labor scythe on his 
arm, a liberty vote in his pocket, and the cap of liberty on 
his head. Which most resembles the testator, claimed as a 
father ? Which looks most like " the spirit of the Constitu- 
tion" and of seventy-six ? Gentlemen of the jury ! As de- 
scendants of the Pilgrim Fathers, what say you ? What 
say you, from Bunker Hill and from Plymouth Rock — from 
Monmouth and from Saratoga — which is the laivful heir? 
At the ballot box you will render your verdict ! 

Glance we now at the constitutional provisions claimed 
for liberty — for the consequent ejectment and banishment, 



CHAP. III. — SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 117 

as an usurper, of the slave power that has crept into the 
mansion house of the testator, and driven his children, in 
cofHe gang, on to the plantation, as slaves. There is the 
item of the " will" that puts the commerce of the Nation, 
foreign and domestic, into the hands, and under the juris- 
diction cf Congress, the representatives of the People, and 
of freemen. Next comes the item that " guaranties to every 
State in this Union, n republican form of government." 
Then come, in succession, the items that inhibit "bills of 
attainder," " laws impairing the obligation of contracts" — 
conferring "titles of nobility" — " making war" upon our 
citizens, or "keeping troops" in time of peace, along with 
the items that secure a jury trial, and the benefits of the 
writ of habeas corpus. At last comes the codicil of " amend- 
ments" to the " will," securing freedom of speech, of peace- 
ably assembling, and of the press — security against "un- 
reasonable seizures" — deprivation of "liberty without due 
prooess of law" — "excessive bail— cruel and unusual pun- 
ishments" and providing "jury trial" where the value of 
twenty dollars is at h-zard. Taking up these items, either 
in the gross or in detail — do they amount to a constitution- 
al veto upon slavery, or do they not ? — We claim to h:.ve 
proved by the rules, and before the Court of "strict con- 
struction" that they do. Is it in the "spirit of the Con- 
stitution," and of seventy-six to reverse the judgment there 
obtained? If not, then that judgment of the lower Court 
must stand, as the ultimate decision of the law. 

But, suppose, for the argument's sake, that the proof be- 
fore the Court of strict construction had been less conclusive 
— that judgment had been suspended — nay, even that it had 
been rendered by that Court, against the claims of freedom, 
and that, on her appeal, instead of that of slavery, the cause 
were now in litigation here. What says the " spirit of the 
Constitution" and of seventy-six, to an issue like this? 

What can it say but, as its noble name and high office 
dictates, exalt the living "spirit" of the instrument, the 
" will," the Constitution, above mere dead letter, the words, 
the syllables, the alphabetical characters it employs? 

Be it so, that the " word-catcher* who live on syllables" 
can read no abolition of slavery in the " guaranty of a re- 
publican form of government," the exemption from " unrea- 
sonable seizures" — the security of liberty except " by due 
process of law" — nor yet in the prohibition of a caste of no- 
bles — of " bills of attainder" — of " laws impairing the obli- 
gation of contracts" — while, at the same time (strange to 
tell) they can find read " fugitive slaves" in " persons held 



118 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

to service and labor," " from whom service and labor may 
be due" — can find " insurrection" in the refusal to work 
without wages, and " domestic violence" in the attempt to 
escape from domestic violence! Be it so, that, on the argu- 
ment of dry technicalities we were wholly at fault, and that 
our opponents held the undisputed field as their own. What 
then'? If there be any significancy in an appeal to " the 
spirit" of the Constitution, we may say of such, as the poet 
has said — 

" Commas and points they set exactly right, 
And 'twere a sin to rob them of their mite !" 

And common sense may determine whether " the spirit" 
that solicitously guards against minor oppressions in minute 
details could tolerate the sum and the climax of all oppres- 
sions in the gross, and reduced to the most perfect system 
of which history furnishes any specimen, or of which the 
human mind can conceive. 

What if it were so, that the letter of the Constitution could 
not rightfully be claimed as a guaranty of such a specific 
form of " republican government," as excludes slavery — 
does not the living "-spirit of (he Constitution" and of this 
provision afford such a guaranty ? To what purpose, or for 
what object, should the form of a representative government 
be preserved, if the people, (instead of a select, a favorite 
caste of them) are not to be represented; nor republican 
principles honored, nor republican liberty and individual se- 
curity preserved ? Is '* the spirit of the Constitution" to be 
satisfied with the mere outward shell, without the vital es- 
sence of a republic ? 

What if it could be doubted or denied that the prohibition 
of "bills of attainder," and of laws " impairing the obliga- 
tion of contracts," were provisions distinctly and directly 
prohibitory of slavery — is it not nevertheless manifest that 
" the spirit" that must needs guard against ordinary bills 
of attainder and against such laws " impairing the obliga- 
tion of contracts" as are less oppressive than the code that 
vitiates the contracts of the laboring population of one half 
the States, is a "spirit" that can never consent to the in- 
comparably more extensive and unrelenting attainder of sla- 
very — the still more unlimited annihilation of contracts 
wrapped up in the slave code ? 

What if it ttere so that the prohibition of titles of nobility 
were not, in due form, a prohibition of the slaveholding 
caste,- the more than villeinage or serfdom of their vassals ? 
Who does not see that the "spirit" that prohibits the 



CHAP. 111. SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 119 

former, must bo still more irreconcilably hostile to the lat- 
ter ? 

What if it were so that the provisions against " unreason- 
able seizures" and against the deprivation of " liberty with- 
out due process of law," were provisions which technically 
considered, could not he directly claimed for the enslaved ; 
— it would nevertheless be true that the living " spirit" and 
vital essence of such provisions demand and authorize the 
instant abolition of slavery. 

What if it ivere so that the benefits of jury trial, and of 
the habeas corpus were not particularly secured or provided, 
for the especial use of the fugitive slave : — can the living 
"spirit" of such provisions be satisfied — can it be preserved 
— in the presence of the Act of Congress of 1793, and the 
decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Prigg versus 
Pennsylvania ? Let passing history answer. 

Most manifestly, if there beany significancy in an appeal 
to " the spirit of the Constitution" for the purpose of ex- 
pounding provisions like these, the exposition must be in 
favor of liberty and against slavery. 

And just at this point, before passing to another topic, we 
must pause to extend somewhat, an observation already 
thrown out in a note, in which it was remarked that the ab- 
sence of any restriction upon the Federal Government, of 
the ordinary, the universal power of all civil governments 
to abolish the slavery existing within their territorial limits, 
was proof positive that no such "compromise" or " guaran- 
ty" in favor of slavery had been made. We now add that 
this circumstance furnishes proof that the Federal Govern- 
ment DOES possess power to abolish slavery, and is bound 
to EXERCISE that power. 

Admitting, as all candid men must do, in review of the 
examination that has now been had, that there is nothing in 
the Federal Constitution establishing our National Govern- 
ment that restricts or prohibits that Government from the 
abolition of slavery, it follows— first, that the common pow- 
ers of all civil governments to "execute justice between a 
man and his neighbor," and consequently to abolish slavery, 
pertain to the Government of the United States ; and conse- 
quently, second, that the same obligations rest on the Fed- 
eral Government to abolish slavery, that rest on every other 
government, on earth, in whose territorial limits slavery is 
practiced. 

Those who remind us that the Federal Government is a 
limited government, and therefore can not abolish slavery, 
always refer us, of course, to the Federal Constitution, for 



120 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

the limitations of which they speak. But the Federal Con- 
stitution contains no limitations of the power of the Federal 
Government in the matter of slavery. That government, 
therefore, retains all the power over slavery that any other 
civil governments hold, and is charged with all the respon- 
sibilities, in respect to it, with which all other civil govern- 
ments are charged. And consequenlly, even in the absence 
of such specific provisions as those we have considered — 
(the guaranty of a republican form of government, the ex- 
emption from unreasonable seizures, inviolability of liberty 
except by due process of law, the prohibition to the States 
of bills of attainder, nullification of contracts, titles of no- 
bility, &c. &c.,) it would still be true that the Federal Gov- 
ernment is amply competent to abolish slavery; whether the 
Constitution be* construed by M strict construction" or by 
* 4 the spirit" of the instrument itself.* 

All this would be true, even upon the supposition that 
any artificial compacts or written parchments, could 'possibly 
construct a civil government that should be a civil govern- 
ment, and yet not be vested with the power of securing in- 
alienable human rights: a proposition we shall not stop to 
discuss in this place, though it may require attention else- 
where. 

SECTION V. 
Special Pleadings : — their fallacy. 

And what has the claimant of constitutional slavery to 
say more, in support of the claim ? Or what reason can be 
given, why sentence of death should not be passed upon 
slavery itself? 

Are we to have a repetition of the cant phrases hitherto 
in use? " The compact," "the guaranty," "the com- 
promises of the Constitution?" Notable words these, 

once but what do they avail now ? What has become of 

them ? 



* To this view it may be objected, thaf by Article 10, of the Amendments, 
the contrary rule is established, viz : that instead of the General Government 
holding all the powers not prohibited; it holds none not specifically granted 
To this it is sufficient to reply, that "the powers delegated to the Lnited 
States" by the Constitution, do include the powers of a M ooterwment, <not a 
mere confederacy.) "of the United States.'' [See Art. 1., Sec. 8, Clause 17.) 
And the " legislative," " judicial," and '« executive" powers of that •« govern- 
ment" are particularly enumerated, and the laws of the United States are de- 
clared to be ■• the supreme lava of the land. 1 ' These delegations of power com- 
prise a full description of the essential powers of a u civil government and 
the '< establishment of justice'' is declared to be the end of the whole. 1 he gen- 
eral powers thus delegated to the United States, (aside from specific provisions) 
are sufficient for the abolition of slavery, unless it can be sh»wn (which it can 
not) that such a particular exercise of power is prohibited in the Constitu- 
tion. 



CHAP. MI. SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 121 

Does the Constitution of 1787-9 contain the "compact?" 
If not, where ^hall wc look for it ? Where is the document, 
or the record, that we may fasten our eyes upon it ? In 
what law library shall we inquire for it? What is the 
name of the book and of the publisher that can put us in 
the possession of it ? In what public archives are they de- 
posited, and who are they that have ever gained access to 
them ? 

National " compacts," " compromises," and " guaranties" 
are wont, in this age of printing presses and of official de- 
positories and records, to have some tangible shape and 
form — some home and abiding place, where ihev may be 
examined and referred to, at pleasure. Not only the learn- 
ed civilian but the humble citizen is wont to possess copies 
of them. They are found on the rural mantle-piece, and 
on the book-shelf of the artisan. They are among the read- 
ing books of the school boy, and become familiar as house- 
hold words. Such are our Declaration of Independence, 
Articles of Confederation, and Constitution of the United 
States. 

Without a question, the Constitution, the Articles of Con- 
federation, and the Declaration of Independence, are the 
national "compacts" of these United States. If there ara 
any others to be produced, where or what are they, or in 
whose hands are they to be found? 

We are sometimes told that if there had not been some 
" compromise" made in respect to slavery the southern States 
would not have come into the Union. It would seem a suf- 
ficient answer to say that the sjuthern States did come into 
the Union, and that in the icritten compact the pretended 
" compromise" is no where to be found. If the southern 
States were so tenacious and jealous, is it credible that they 
would consent to leave the " compromise" out of the writing ? 
Did they trust to some " implied faith" and " tacit under- 
standing" that was entered int^, at the time, without being 
committed to paper ? By whom was that "implied faith" 
pledged? Withwhom was that understanding held ? With 
parti :ulnr members of that secret Convention in which the 
Constitution was drafted ? Who then were the parties to 
the " compact" to the " implied faith," the "tacit under- 
standing ?" " We, the People of the United States, " knew 
nothing of the matter, any farther than appeared in the 
written document itself, that was submitted to the people, 
for adoption. If the People of the southern States (who, 
by the bye, could have known no more of these secret un- 
derstandings than the People of the North did,) adopted 



122 AMEEICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

the Constitution, trusting in the " implied faith" and " tacit 
understanding" with individuals of the Convention, then 
they trusted in those individuals, whoever they were, and 
must look to them, and not to the People of the United 
States. 

It would be just as easy to say (and more easy to prove) 
that the People of the North would not have come into the 
Union with any known compromise or guaranty of slavery, 
as it is to say that the People of the South would not have 
come into the Union without it. 

If it be said that two or three of the slave States — the 
Carolinas and Georgia — were backward to come into the 
Union because Congress was clothed with power to abolish 
that foreign slave-trade, the abolition of which was then 
thought to be equivalent to the abolition of slavery — the fact 
that they nevertheless did come into the Union, shows that 
they did it with their eyes open, and after full time to delib- 
erate and consider. And we might offset these hesitancies 
of the far South w T ith the fact that Rhode Island accompanied 
her ratification of the Constitution with the proposed Amend- 
ment that the slave-trade should be speedily abolished, and 
that her ratification was expressly made M in confidence that 
the Amendment" would " speedily become a part of the 
Constitution." 

And, so far as the States, or the People of the States are 
concerned, who could have been the parties to the "compact" 
and " the compromise" about slavery ? All the States were 
slaveholding States, then, but ?io?ieo( them expected to con- 
tinue so. But for the unexpected culture of cotton, and the 
invention of Whitney's cotton gin, it is commonly thought 
that slavery would have run out, in the course of that gene- 
ration, or at any rate, could not have long survived the abo- 
lition of the slave-trade. 

So far from its being true that the southern States would 
not have ratified the Constitution if they had thought the 
Congress would have abolished slavery, they did ratify the 
Constitution believing that the anticipated abolition of the 
slave-trade bv Congress would be (as it was intended to be) 
the virtual aboli.ion of slavery throughout the States. This 
assertion is not destitute of proof. 

TheFederal Convention was held in 17S7, and in the same 
year, Judge Wilson, one of the members of that Convention, 
declared in the Pennsylvania Conventiun for its ratification, 
that the Constitution laid a foundation for " banishing sla- 
very out of the country." And he added, " in the lapse 
of a few years, and CONGRESS will have power to exter- 



CHAP. III. SPIRIT OP THE CONSTITUTION. 123 

minate slavery within our borders." By this public dec- 
laration, Judge Wilson obtained the assent of the lYnii>yl- 
vania Quakers to the Constitution. No man contradicted 
his statements, yet the southern ratifications which came 
indeed afterwards, and tardily, were not withheld on that 
account. 

In Virginia the matter was well understood. Gov. Ran- 
dolph said : — 

" They insist that the abolition of slavery will result from this Constitu- 
tion. I hope that there is no one here, who will advance an objection so 
dishonorable to Virginia. I hope that at the moment they are securing 
the rights of their citizens, an objection will not be started, that those un- 
fortunate men now held in bondage, BY THE OPERATION OF THE 
GENERAL GOVERNMENT, may be made FREE." 

This was said in the Virginia Convention for adopting 
the Federal Constitution. Whether there were nny in that 
Convention, who dishonored Virginia by objecting to the 
acknowledged power of the Federal Government over sla- 
very, we are not informed. If there were, their views did 
not prevail. The Constitution was adopted. Similar slate* 
ments are said to have been made in the Conventions oi 
other States. 

And what if it vjerc so, that in the secret Convention that 
drafted the Constitution, there were men who wished to 
shape the instrument in such an ambiguous manner as to 
favor slavery, without saying so, in direct and honest terms? 
And what if it could be proved that this were so, and that 
they succeeded in their designs, so far as the drafting of the 
instrument is concerned? Would the ''PEOPLE OF 
THE UNITED STATES," who knew nothing of the 
fraudulent procedure, be bound by the wicked intentions of 
the framers, or of a portion of them, instead of the natural 
import of the language they employed ? Would "strict con- 
struction" say so? Or is the "spirit of the Constitution" to 
be accounted identical with the dishonest spirit of such men, 
who, after all, did not dare to express, in the document, their 
nefarious designs? Are we to be bound by their secret and 
unrighteous purposes, rather than by the righteous words 
they were obligei to employ, in order to make their docu- 
ment acceptable to the People ?■* 

We do not say nor e/en intimate that such were the facts : 
but we do say that if the oft repeated story of an " under- 
standing" in favor of slavery, among the members of the 
Federal Convention, be founded in truth; and if, as is far- 

* See Address to the Liberty Party in the United States, by Alvak Stkwart, 
Esq., Chairman of the National Liberty Committee —Liberty Pre«, June 4, 
1844. 



124 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

ther alleged, the disputed provision of the Constitution con- 
cerning " persons held to service and labor," was the result of 
that secret "understanding" and if the very remarkable 
phraseology there employed, (carefully excluding the word 
slave, and "by no means describing the condition of a slave,) 
was intended nevertheless, by the writers, to apply to fugi- 
tive slaves, then the annals of political chicanery furnish 
nothing more reprehensible and deserving the indignation 
of mankind. Let those see to it, who would make such 
representations of the facts. If there are any who impeach 
the characters of the framersof the Constitution, before the 
world, they are the persons. 

For, according to their statements, what were the facts? 
And what was their conduct? 

With the policy of holding the Convention in secret, we 
have nothing to say. We only allude to the fact that it u-as 
so held. The history of the " Secret Proceedings and De- 
bates of the Federal Convention," furnished us by two of 
the members, Messrs. Yates and Lansing, of the State of 
New- York, tells us the story, as does likewise the commu- 
nication of Luther Martin, of Maryland, (another member,) 
to the Legislature of his own State, which appears in the 
same volume. " The doors," says Mr. Martin, "were to be 
shut, and the whole proceedings were to be kept secret, and so 
far did this rule extend, that we were thereby prevented 
from corresponding with gentlemen in the different States, 
upon the subjects under our discussion." 

This was in 1787. The Constitution was adoped by the 
States during that year and the year following, and went 
into operation in 1789. Not until thirty-two years after- 
wards — not until the year 1S21, do Messrs. Yates and Lan- 
sino- lift the veil ofsecresy from the "proceedings and de- 
bates of the Convention," revealing, by the bye, in addi- 
tion to the strong and apparently unanswered anti-slavery 
speech of Luther Martin of Maryland, very little that 
throws lio-ht on the views held in the Convention on that 
subject. Many years afterwards come the celebrated posthu- 
mous papers of Mr. Madison. And are we now to be told, 
that the "spirit of the Const it u1io?i" is to be ascertained 
only by the secret, and for the most part, yet unrepealed 
sayings and doings of the Convention of 17S7 — that the 
Constitution must be construed to mean what Messrs. So- 
and-So are rumored to have said in that secret Convention — 
that the "compromises" and "guaranties" of the " compact" 
are to be looked after, in the secret and unknown doings of 
that Convention — NOT in the document they elaborated, 



CHAP. III. — SPIRIT OF TIE CONSTITUTION. 125 

nor yet in the ACTS and INTENTIONS of the People 
who took the instrument at its word, and adopted it, for what 
its words made it ? 

But since the posthumous papers of Mr. Madison have 
been claimed to be in favor of the peculiar institution, the 
guaranty, and the comp r omise, let us look at a specimen or 
two, and see how they read : 

' "Mr. Gerry thought we had nothing to do with the conduct of the States 
as to slaves, but ought to be careful not to give any sanction to it.' - — 
Madison papers, Vol. HI. page 1394. 

"Mr. Madison thought it wrong to introduce in the Constitution the 
idea that there could be property in man."— lb. Vol. III. pages 1429, and 
1430. 

"Article 1, Section 2. On motion of Mr. Randolph, the word 'servitude' 
was struck out, and 'service' unanimously inserted— the former being 
thought to express the condition of slaves, and the latter the obligation 
of free persons."— lb. Vol. HI. page 1569. 

We have the testimony of Mr. Madison, then, to the fact, 
that Mr. Randolph and the entire Convention, without a 
dissenting voice, determined to frame Article 1, Section 2, 
in such a manner that it SHOULD NOT be understood to 
" express the condition of slaves," but SHOULD be under- 
stood to "express the obilgation of FREE PERSONS !" 

The framers of the Constitution either intended a " com- 
promise" or "guaranty" in favor of slavery, or they did not — 
they either intended to secure the return of fugitive slaves, 
or they did not. 

If thev did, then they deliberately intended and artfully 
labored to DO THE THING without TELLING THE 
PEOPLE that they had done it — without revealing the fact, 
by the words they employed ! The words slave and slavery 
were, in that case, carefully avoided, and the description 
could not have been commonly understood as applicable to 
the slave. Ic was not, in fact, applicable to the slave — and 
even allowing the fraud were intended, the extreme care to 
avoid the detection of the intention prevented the thi.g in- 
tended from being done ! But suppose they had succeeded 
in a covert yet correct description of the condition of the 
s l ave — would the PEOPLE be^bound by the intentions of 
the persons thev employed to draft the instrument, or by 
THEIR OWN? 

To put the strongest possible case and give the slave 
power the benefit of the worst possible supposition that can 
be made, we will suppose that the people themselves, or a 
majority of them, in looking upon, and adopting the Con- 
stitution as a whole, deliberately intended the absurdity and 
impossibility of securing their own liberties and yet putting 
their heels on the necks of their enslaved brothers! A 



126 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

more diabolical act could r.ot well be described, to be sure, 
but suppose it were even so, what the?i? It still remains 
true that they intended to secure their own liberties, and that 
in order to do so, they intended to put such words and 
phrases into the instrument as would answer that purpose. 
It seems too, from an examination of t?«e instrument that 
they had some correct notion of the proper language to be 
used. Well — they made use of that language — but with a 
latent *« understanding" that the benefits of it should apply 
only to the " free white" inhabitants, and not to the enslaved! 
But that distinction they were either afraid or ashamed to 
write down. The consequence is, the document itself does 
secure the rights of the whole population, whenever it is 
properly applied. The question arises whether the " spirit" 
(along with the letter) of the document is the same as the 
"spirit" of those who adopted it ? And whether the present 
generation may not and should not use the document accord- 
ing to itself, and not according to them ? Had they used 
the Bible itself (as they might effectually have used much 
of it) for the same purpose — would the " spirit" of the 
Bible and their spirit be one and the same thing ? 

Suppose six brothers should have an "understanding" 
with each other, and in writing an instrument for the 
government of the whole family of twelve brothers, should 
write it so that the instrument would appear very fair in the 
eyes of all who should look upon it, and that by a fair con- 
struction, it would secure the equal rights of the whole. 
Yet, by their "understanding" of the matter, some circum- 
locutions and ambiguities introduced for that object, into the 
paper, are intended to be used to deprive the other six of 
their rights. The question is whether an honest judge and 
jury may not use the document itself, fairly construed to 
secure for the whole family their rights, or whether they 
must needs be governed, in their decision, by the fraudulent 
intentions of the six, and so help carry them out, in their 
verdict and judgment ! 

'Twere needless to trace out and expose, in detail, all 
the puerilities that have been uttered against the abolition 
of slavery, by Congress, in the District of Columbia. The 
only pertinent question is, by what right, authority or war- 
rant, Congress has enacted slavery, there. 

What absurdity can exceed that of saying that the wishes 
or the laws of Virginia and Maryland must govern the le- 
gislation of Congress for the District? That there was an 
"implied faith" to that effect in the cession of the ten miles 
square! The acts of cession tell their own story. And so 



CHAP. IV. THE STATE CONSTITUTIONS. 127 

does the clause of the Constitution authorizing the accept- 
ance by Congress. With any such reservation, ConLT 
had no constitutional authority to accept it, nor could its 
possession have answered the well known objects of the 
Constitution in providing for such a District. It had been 
found that Congress could not act independently while -it- 
ting in a location controlled by State policy, and State au- 
thority. Virginia and Maryland knew all this, and they 
understood and ratified the Constitution, before the cession 
was made. And to say that Congress must not abolish 
slavery in the District, without a vote from the inhabitants, 
is to establish a priuciple which would wholly abrogate the 
legislative authority }f Congress over theDistrict, and leave 
it in a state of anarchy, without any civil government, at 
all ! The power of Congress to abolish slavery in the Dis- 
trict, has never, until within a few years, been denied, and 
has been conceded by the most eminent statesmen of the 
South — by those now loudest against the exercise of the 
power. 

CHAPTER IV. 

OF THE LEGALITY OF SLAVERY, BY THE CON- 
STITUTIONS OF THE SLAVE STATES. 

State of the Question— Abolition of Slavery in Massachusetts— Slavery 
Unconstitutional in Delaware — Is Slavery Constitutional in Maryland ? — 
Other States— North Carolina, South Carolina, Louisiana, Kentucky, 
Tennessee, Mississippi— Conclusion. 

If slavery be inconsistent with the Constitution of the 
United States, it is natural to inquire whether it be consist- 
ent with the Constitutions of the States wherein it exists. 

And this question resolves itself into another, namely, 
whether the spirit and letter of those Constitutions agree, 
in the main, with the Constitution of the United States, or 
in other words, whether they embody " a republican form 
of government" which " the United States" have guarantied 
" to every State in this Union" — whether, like the States 
formed out of the North Western Territory, they are " re- 
publican States" and can " have no slavery ?" 

To answer this question in the affirmative, is to say that 
slavery in these States is illegal, because contrary to the 
State "Constitutions. To answer it in the negative, is t 
that Congress is bound to interfere, under the fourth section 
of the fourth article of the Federal Constitution, and provide 
for them republican forms or constitutions of government. 



128 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

Abolition of Slavery in Massachusetts. 

In one of the States where slaves were formerly held, a 
judicial decision, without any statute enacted by the legisla- 
ture, declared that slavery was illegal. 

"In Massachusetts, it was judicially declared, soon after the Revolu- 
tion, that slavery was virtually abolished by the Constitution, and that 
the issue of a female slave, though born prior to the Constitution, wa3 
born free."— Kent's Commentary, page 252. 

In giving the opinion of the Court in the case of the Com- 
monwealth versus Thomas Aves, in 1S33, Chief Justice 
Shaw said: — 

" How, or by what act, particularly, slavery was abolished in Massa- 
chusetts, whether cy the adoption of the opinion in Somerset's case, as a 
declaration and modification of the Common Law, or by the Declaration 
of Independence, or by the Constitution of 1780,* it is not now very easy to 
determine, and it is rather a matter of curiosity than utility, it being 
agreed on all hands, that if not abolished before, it was so, by the decla- 
ration of rights. * * * * 

" Without pursuing this inquiry farther, it is sufficient for the purposes 
of the case before us, that by the Constitution adopted in 1780, slavery 
was abolished in Massachusetts, upon the ground that it is contrary to 
natural right and the plain principles of justice. The terms of the first 
article of the declaration of rights are plain and explicit. ' All men are 
born free and equal, and have certain natural, essential, and unalienable 
rights, which are the right of enjoying and defending their lives and 
liberties, that of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property.' It 
would be difficult to select words more precisely adapted to the abolition 
of slavery."— Pickering's Reports, page 209-10. 

Slavery Unconstitutional in Delaware. 

Is Massachusetts, the only Slate in the Union that has a 
"[bill of rights," and a "Constitution" that recognizes the 
sreat central truth of republicanism that " all men are born 
free and equal?" 

What say " our brethren of the South ?" Do they come 
in for no share of the great national birthright of freedom ? 
Let us take a peep into their Constitution?, and sec. 

The Preamble of the Constitution of Delaware, we have 
quoted, in another connection. Very manifestly there can 
be no constitutional slavery in Delaware, and nothing is 
wanting but a judicial decision, like that of Massachusetts, 
to abolish slavery in that State. " All men' are declared 
by the organic iaw of Delaware, to have, by nature, the 
rights of worshipping and serving tkeir Creator according to 
the dictates of their consciences, of enjoying and defending 
life and liberty, of acquiring and protecting reputation and 
property.'" No statute could be enacted more authoritative 
or explicit than this. The Constitution of Delaware provides 

* That is. the Constitution of ihe State. 



CHAP. IV. THE STATE CONSTITUTIONS. 129 

for freedom of speech and of the press and religious free- 
dom. It says: — 

"The people shall be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and 
possessions, from unreasonable searches and seizures. 

" No attainder shall work corruption of hood, nor, except during the 
life of the offender, forfeiture of estate." 

In the ent re document we meet with no discrimination 
on account of color, and no mention of slavery or slaves. 

If slavery be not illegal in Delaware where is it illegal? 
This Constitution was adopted in 1792, and (we believe) 
after the judicial abolition of slavery in Massachusetts, so 
that the legal effect of su:h Constitutions could not have 
been unknown or forgotten. 

Is Slavery Constitutional in Maryland ? 

" We, the delegates of Maryland," fee., &c, declare, " That all govern- 
ment of right originates from THE PEOPLE, is founded incompact 
only, and instituted solely for ihe GOOD OF THE WHOLE." 

"That the INHABITANTS of Maryland are entitled to the COM- 
MON LAW OF ENGLAND." 

['Entitled to emancipation from slavery' could scarcely 
have been more explicit.] 

And again, the phrase " the inhabitants of Maryland" is 
repeated. Further, it is declared — 

" That the right, in the PEOPLE, to participate in the legislature, is 
the best security of liberty and the foundation of all free govern- 
ment."* 

"That every man has a right to petition the legislature, for the re- 
dress of grievances, in apeaceableand orderly manner." 

" That paupers ought not to be assessed for the support of government, 
but every other person in the State ought to contribute his proportion of 
public taxes," &c. 

"That monopolies are odious, contrary to the spirit of a free govern- 
ment, and ought not to be suffered." 

" That no title of nobility, or hereditary honors ought to be granted 
in this State." 

[No exception is here made for the "hereditary honors" 
of white persons or of slaveholders.] 

The above are found in the Declaration of Rights, in the 
Constitution which was framed in August, 177G. 

Other States. 

North Carolina.— " Declaration of Rights .--'-'That all political 
power is vestedin, and derived from the peoi'Li. OK I v." " 1 hat no man, 
or set of men are entitled to exclusive or separate emoluments ..r privi- 
leges from the community, but in consideration of public Bei 
" That the freedom of ihe press is one of the great bulwarks of liberty, 
and therefore ought never to be restrained/" "Thai 
natural and unalienable right to worship Almighty God , according to 

* Another definition of " a republican form of government." 

9 



130 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

the dictates of their own consciences.'-"* " That a frequent recurrence 
to fundamental principles is absolutely necessary to preserve the bless- 
ings of liberty." •' That perpetuities and monopolies are contrary to 
the genius of a free Slate, f and OUGHT NOT TO BE ALLOWED." 

In the Constitution of North Carolina, (as in those of 
Delaware and Maryland,) we find no establishment of slave- 
ry, and no authority vested in the legislature to establish it. 
On the contrary, the Constitution (Article 44) explicitly 

says — 

" That the Declaration of Rights is hereby declared to be a part of the 
Constitution of this State, and ought never to be violated on any pretence 
whatever." 

How then, can there be any constitutional validity in the 
remarkably rigid slave statutes of North Carolina, by which 
the rights of conscience are violated, " fundamental princi- 
ples" outraged, and monopolies established ? 

South Carolina. — Even in this State, the Constitution 
provides for " the free exercise and enjoyment of religious 
profession and worship" and " trial by jury," " The liberty 
of the press, shall be forever inviolably preserved." Other 
parts of the document, however, are in bad keeping with 
these provisions, which, if carried out, would not fail to 
abolish slavery. Which part- of the Constitution is to be 
considered indicative of its " spirit," and which must be set 
aside as anomalous, we will not now stop to inquire. 

Louisiana. — The Preamble to the Constitution declares 
that — " We, the representatives of the people," &c; " in or- 
der to secure to all the citizens thereof, the enjoyment of 
all the rights of life, liberty, and property, do ordain and 
establish the following Constitution or form of government, 
and do mutually agree with each other, to form ourselves 
into a free\ AND independent State," &c, &c. The Con- 
stitution says — 

" Printing presses shall be free to every person who undertakes to ex- 
amine the proceedings of the legislature, or any branch of the govern- 
ment, and no law shall ever be made to restrain the right thereof. The 
free communication of thoughts and opinions is one of the INVIOLA- 
BLE RIGH TS OF MAN, and every citizen may freely speak, write, and 
print on any subject, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty." 
—Article 21. 

" All laws contrary to this Constitution shall be null and void." — 
Article 2d. 

The gentlemen of the legal profession will have little dif- 
ficulty in determining whether the following statute of Lou- 
isiana, a part of its slave code, is constitutionally " null and 
void." 

* And yet, in North Carolina, the laws forbid the slaves to be taught to read 
the Hible, or to be in possession of one ! " In North Carolina the law prohibits 
a free colored man. whatever may be his attainments or ecclesiastical author- 
ity, to preach the Gospel."— Jny's Inquiry, page 33. 

f Implying thai North Carolina was to ee a " free State." 

{But is Louisiana a. free State ? 



CHAP. IV. THE STATE CONSTITUTIONS. K31 

"If any person shall use any language from (lie bar, bench, fftgt, pul- 
pit, or any other place, or lioiit any conbersati m having a pendency to 
promote discontent among free colored people, or insabordiwdii in among 
slaves, he may re imprisoned at hard labor, not les> than three nor i 
than twenty-one years, or he may sutler DEATH, at the discretion of the 
Court.'' 

Kentucky.— "We, the representatives of the PL' ipu; ,,r n, ( . - 
of Kentucky, in Convention assembled to secure Uxill the citizens tl i 
tlie enjoyment of the right to life, LIBERTY, and property, and oJ pur- 
suing happiness, do ordain this Constitution for its government." 

Among other things, the Constitution declares — 

"That all power is inherent in the people, and all/rce governments are 
founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safely and hap- 
piness/' 

" That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty 
God, according to the dictates of their own consciences." 

Freedom of speech and of the press are then secured in 
the same language as in the Constitution of Louisiana. 

Strange to tell, the same document contains 'a provision 
that the legislature shall have " no power lo pass laws for the 
emancipation of slaves without the consent of their owners, 
or without paying their owners, previous to such emancipa- 
tion, a full equivalent in money for the slaves so emanci- 
pated !" 

It might well be questioned whether the legislature could 
enact or whether the Judiciary or Executive could enforce or 
execute slave laws without a violation of the fundamental 
•principles of the Constitution of Kentucky ! When a docu- 
ment stultifies itself in this -manner, it would puzzle "strict 
construction" to make any thing but contradiction and self- 
subversion out of it. And " the spirit" of such a Constitu- 
tion might be difficult to be ascertained. "We will only say 
that if the free features of this Constitution are to stand as 
valid, the pro-slavery features are lo be set aside as incon- 
gruous and impracticable. But if these latter are to be held 
valid, then the former must be nugatory, and the Kentucki- 
ans are wholly without the benefits of their declarations and 
provisions in favor of liberty. 

Tennessee.— Declaration of Rights.—" That all power is Inherent In 
the PEOPLE, and all free governments are founded on their authority 
and instituted for theirpeace, safety, and happiness; for the advancement 
of those ends, they have AT ALL TIMES an inalienable and indefeasible 
RIGHT to alter, reform, or ABOLISH the government, in such MAN- 
NER, as they may think proper.'' 

The " inalienable and indefeasible RIGHT" of "the peop'c'" of Ken- 
tucky— (nearly one third of whom are slaves and free " people" ofcolor 
— and.a small minority of whom are slaveholders:— to ABOLISH tlie 
government they live under, "in rach MAN NEK as they may think pr< 
is prettv strongly stated in this article— and with less of the pence prin- 
ciple in it, than the " incendiary abolitionists' 3 would have been likely 
to have introduced! — Furthermore it is declared — 

"That atfjnen-haveanatuial and indefeasible right to worship Al- 
mighty God according to the dictates of their own conscience.?— ** That 
the PEOPLE shall be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and posses- 



132 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

sions, from unreasonable searches and seizures ;" — " that no conviction 
shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture of estate ;" — " that the printing 
presses shall be free" &c. (as in the oth^r Constitutions) " that perpetui- 
ties and monopolies arc contrary to the genius of a free State, and ought not 
to be allowed." 

[That is, no "compromise" ought to he made with them !] 
The lawyer would have had a hard task that should un- 
dertake to prove, before a Court of sound and upright con- 
stitutional jurists, the constitutionality of slavery in Tennes- 
see, notwithstanding the aristocratic structure of the State 
government, operating to strengthen the slave power. 

Mississippi. — " We the Representatives of the people inhabiting the 
western part of the Mississippi territory," &c. &c, " in order to secure 
to the citiz ens thereof the rights of life, liberty, and property, do ordain 
and establish the following Constitution and form of government, and do 
mutually agree with each other to form ourselvelves into a free and in- 
dependent State." 

" That the* general, great, and essential principles of liberty" [not 
slavery] " and free government may be recognized and established, we 
declare," &c. 

The " declaration of rights" then proceeds to affirm — " that 
all political power is inherent in the people," &c, (repeat- 
ing the declaration of Tennessee with its righf to " abolish" 
&c.) also that " every citizen may freely speak, write and 
publish his sentiments, on all subjects," &c. — that " no law 
shall ever be passed to curtail or restrain the liberty of 
speech or of the press" — " that the people shall be secure in 
their persons, &c. from unreasonable seizures" — that " the 
right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate" — that " every 
citizen has a right to bear arms for the defence of himself 
and the State," <fec. &c. 

To give these " great and essential principles of liberty," 

all the force of organic law, paramount to statute law, it is 

carefully added, by way of "conclusion" to this Declaration — 

"To guard against transgression of the high powers herein delegated 
we declare that every thing in this article is excepted out of the general' 
powers of government, and shall fore ver remain inviolate ; and that aW 
laics contrary thereto, or to the following provisions, shall be void. 

But the Constitution itself, in utter forgetfulness of these 
" essential principles" provides, that " the general assembly 
shall have no power to pass laws for the emancipation of 
slaves without the consent of their owners, unless where a 
slave shall have rendered the State some essential service, in 
which case the owner shall be paid a full equivalent for the 
slaves so emancipated."* 

A number of curious questions might be started here. 
Does not the declaration of rights render null and "void" 

* Quert.— Do the Mississippians consider their " slaves better off" in sla- 
very than emancipated ? , 



CHAP. IV. — THE STATE CONSTITUTIONS. ]33 

the above provision of the Constitution ? Or must the lat- 
ter stand, and make "void" the former? Both can not be 
valid, of course, or if they are, the Constitution itself is 
" null" by equipoise. 

Suppose a judicial decision, under " the great and essen- 
tial principles of liberty" which "shall forever remain in- 
violate" and of which it is declared in the bill of rights that 
"all laws contrary thereto" (not excepting the slave laws) 
"are void" — should\declare the slaves in Mississippi eman- 
cipated — the question arises whether the prohibition to the 
"general assembly" forbidding them to emancipate the 
slaves, would apply to the Judicial Court ? 

What endless illustrations have we, of the utter incom- 
patibility of SLAVERY with FREE INSTITUTIONS! To Suppose 

them both to exist, legally, at the same time — wh'at can ex- 
ceed the absurdity? And how manifest that a slave State 
can not enjoy a republican government ! 

Conclusion. 

These specimens must suffice. In a former chapter we 
cited some of the pro-slavery and other associated aristocra- 
tic features of the Constitutions of the slave States, in proof 
that they did not exemplify republicanism, nor harmonize 
with " a republican form of government." With all due 
impartiality we have presented the brighter features of some 
of those Constitutions, now. 

Some of those Constitutions, (that of Delaware, at least, 
if not some others,) may fairly be claimed, we think, as sub- 
versive of slavery, though containing features, even then, so 
aristocratic and anti-republican, as to warrant the interfer- 
ence of Congress, under the national "guaranty" of "a re- 
publican form of government to every State in this Union." 
And a correction of those abuses and oligarchies, in the 
slave States, would carry with it the abolition of slavery. 

In some of the slave States, then, slavery is illegal, be- 
cause contrary to the Constitutions of the States where it 
exists. In others of them, the Constitutions are so palpably 
anti-republican as to call loudly for the constitutional guar- 
anty of the United States. If in others of them, the Con- 
stitutions are difficult of exposition, Congress has a right to 
demand distinctness and decision.* In the cases where the 

* In the correspondence of the Oberlin Anti-Slavery Committer with Hon. 
Wm. Andrews, (vide Friend of Man, July 31, 1S39, ) we meet with the following 
paragraph : 

" Of all the Constitutions ever formed by the people of the Union and of the 
States, not one fails to recognize the paramount authority and sit] rcmacy of God. 
To quote the words of every Constitution, would be laborious to us and tirr- 



134 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

Constitution is for liberty and the statute for slavery, the 
Congress has a right to demand that they shall harmonize. 
The "spirit of the Constitution" was not in quest of shells, 
of shadows, or shams, when it demanded for every State in 
this Union a republican form of government — nor will a free 
people, deserving the appellation, be satisfied with the mere 
name, instead of the thing signified by it. A government 
may be anti-slavery without being republican. But it can 
not be republican without being anti-slavery.' 



. CHAPTER V. 
THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE. 

The charter of liberty, but never claimed as a " guaranty of slavery" 
—The Declaration, a part of American Constitutional Law— Proofs of 
this position — A Constitution of Government denned — The Constitution 
of 1776, still unrepealed — Historical facts — The alternative — The Decla- 
ration of Independence, if the act of separate States,equally fatal to legal 
slavery — The Declaration, never repudiated by the slave States, is still 
binding upon them. 

In disposing of the claims of slavery, under the Consti- 
tution of 1787-9 — we have disposed of all its pretensions to 
a " compact," "compromise" or "guaranty," on the part of 
the General Government, or of the people of the United 
States. Back of that date, and beyond the framing of that 
instrument, it never adventures to travel. It never alludes 
to the " compact" made in the "Articles of Confederation" 
in 1778, nor to the earlier " compact" of the Declaration of 
Independence in 1776. It has an instinctive dread of those 
" compacts." 

Not so with the claims of liberty and emancipation. 
They are of older date, and gain in freshness and vigor the 
farther they are traced. 

The Declaration, a part of Constitutional Law. 

When we closed our direct examination of the Federal 
Constitution of 1787-9, and of the Constitutions of the sev- 
eral States, we did not close our examination of American 
Constitutional Law.* This statement will doubtless sur- 

some to our readers, but for the benefit of those who wish to examine the mat- 
ter, we refer to some of the articles where this recognition can be found. See 
Hogan and Thompson's Edition of the American Constitutions, pages 3, 6, 6, 
13, 21, 25, 27, 48, 49, OS, 75, 95, US, 126, 154, 159, 192, 203, 220, 227, 262, 273, 299 ; 
294, 318, 327, 355, 362." 

* A law volume before us bears the following title page. " Constitittional 
Liw, comprising the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, 
the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitutions of the several 
States composing the Union." Washington, Gales & Seaton, 1820. 



CHAP. V. DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE. 136 

prise some, whose idea of a Constitution of civil government 
never goes beyond the piece o( paper or par ; : 
have been accustomed to hear called by that technical nam'-. 
The thought never entered their minds that the Ameri 
people could have had a Constitution ofGovernmei 
the sittings of the Convention of 1787. Still less have they 
ever suspected that any thing besides the document I 
framed can be properly considered as forming a part of o ir 
Constitutional Law, at the present time, or that any remains 
of suck lata could survive the wreck of that paper, if all the 
authenticated copies of it should be lost or burned, or 'if, by 
any foreign invasion or domestic disorder, or dismember- 
ment, the present arrangements under it should be thrown 
off of their present track. 

Definition of a Constitution. 

" Constitutional Law" has been defined to be " ^funda- 
mental principles of a government, showing the true intent, 
meaning, and end of its formation. And the effect of these 
declared principles will be to limit all authority under the 
government to their own spirit, and make whatever is done 
contrary to them unconstitutional and void."* In strict ac- 
cordance with this, is the definition of our approved lexi- 
cons. A " Constitution' 1 ' according to Webster is " the es- 
tablished form of government in a State, kingdom, or coun- 
try ; a system of fundamental rules, principles, and ordi- 
nances, for the government of a State or nation." 

The Constitution of 1776, still Unrepealed. 

Were the United States without any thing of this kind 
until 1787-9? And is there no manner of connection be- 
tween the present Federal Constitution and the Constitution- 
al Law that preceded it ? 

We have had a National Government ever since the -1th 
of July, 1776, a National Government that had its "Conti- 
nental Congress" — its "Continental army"' — its " Conti- 
nental money" too, as some may remember. This National 
Government carried on a National war, appointed National 
officers to transact public affairs, — entered in ne- 

gotiations — procured recognitions from foreign its 

legitimate authority, and of the independence of the Nation 
it governed— made treaties, concluded a peace. 

And was this National Government without any " funda- 



" Seventy-six— a writer in the Emancipator of Jin 



136 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

mental rules and principles"* all this time ? Was it even 
without a written, a documentary, an authenticated, a Na- 
tional expression of those "fundamental rules and princi- 
ples ?" What was the " Declaration of Independence" with 
its self-evident truths, and its declared object of instituting 
a new government , founded on those principles, but such an 
expression ? And what was that expression but the promul- 
gation of a Constitution ? The minute details of the gov- 
ernment, to be sure, were not then fixed upon. That was 
left for the " Articles of Confederation," two years after- 
wards, and these were altered into the Federal Constitution 
about ten years after that time, other "Amendments" have 
been since added, and other changes may hereafter take 
place. 

In all this, has the "Declaration of Independence" been 
repealed? If it has, then " the thirteen United States of 
America" have ceased to be such, and have sunk back into 
British colonies again. If it has not, then its essential and 
distinctive character, as the fundamental basis and ground 
work of American Constitutional Law, remains unchanged, 
and in full force. 

We are the same " United States of America" that we 
declared ourselves " of right" to be, in July, 1776. We 
claimed the right, on the ground of the self-evident truths 
we then recognized as the basis of the new government. If 
we have renounced those self-evident truths, or have ceased 
to place them at the basis of our National Government, then 
we have renounced the right to have any National Govern- 
ment at all. 

Historical Facts. 

A vague notion prevails that, in the first place, there were 
thirteen separate, disunited States, wholly independent of 
each other, and that this condition of things continued until 
the adoption of the Federal Constitution of 1787-9, when, 
for the first time, they became " United States," and under 
the authority of a General Government. But this theory is 
at war with incontrovertible historical facts, and stubborn 
chronological dates. Before the Declaration of Indepen- 
dence, July 4, 1776, there were no independent sovereign 
States; and the Declaration which asserted their indepen- 
dence, asserted likewise their union, as "United States of 

* A Constitution may either be written or unwritten, or (like the British 
Constitution) partly written and partly unwritten. Common Law is the soul 
of the British Constitution. " Unwritten or Common Law— a r,ule of actn • 
which derives its authority from long usage, or established custom." — Websti . 



CHAP. V. — DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE. 1.J7 

Ameri:a," affirming, moreover the object of their as8UQD 
indepence to be the institution of a new eooernmi 
governments) upon the basis of the self-evident principle! 
then recognized.* There has been no State sovereignty 
that has not been connexed with the unity of the .States, unci 
modified by it. The "Articles of Confederation," that were 
several years under discussion before their adoption, were 
shaped nearer in accordance with the notion of separate 
State sovereignty than either the Declaration of Indepen- 
dence or the Federal Constitution, yet even this document, 
described, to some extent, a General Government, but be- 
ing found defective, in this very particular, the Convention 
of 1787 was called, and the theory of the declaration of In- 
dependence was, in the new Constitution, more completely 
restored. 

For a more minute statement of these facts, the reader is 
referred to an oration delivered at Newburyport, by John 
Quincy Adams, July 4, 1837. A few extracts from that 
oration will not only confirm what we have said, but help to 
indicate the important ends which those facts should be 
made to subserve. 

" They had been British colonies — distinct and subordinate portions of 
one great community. In the struggle against one common oppressor, 
by a moral centripetal impulse, they had spontaneously coalesced into 
ONE PEOPLE. They declare themselves such, in express terms, by 
this paper. The members of the Congress who signed their names to 
the Declaration, style themselves the Representatives, not of the separate 
colonies, but of the United States of America, in Congress assem- 
bled. No one colony is named in the Declaration, nor is there anything 
on its face, indicating from which of the colonies, any one of the signers 
were delegated. They proclaim the separation of one people from an- 
other. They affirm the right of the People to institute, alter, and abol- 
ish their government; and their final language is — ' We do, in the name, 
and by the authority of the good People of these colonies, solemnly pub- 
lish and declare that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, 
Free and Independent States.' The Declaration was not, that each 
of the States was separately free and independent, but that such was their 
united condition. And so essential was their Union, both in principle 
and in fact, to their freedom and independence that, had one of the colo- 
nies seceded from the rest, and undertaken to declare herself free and in- 
dependent, she could have maintained neither her independence nor her 
freedom. 

"And, this one People did notify the world of mankind that they 
thereby die assume, 'among the powers of the earth' the se) 
and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitled 
them."— Pages 11, 12. 

" The idea of separate State sovereignty had evidently no part in the 
composition of this paper." — lb. page 33. 

* None of the separate Slates had declared independence before this national 
declaration. The Constitutions of all the States ;ire of later date, except that 
of New Jersey, which bears date July 2, 1776, but in this document no mention 
is made of independent State sovereignty. On the otl 
was used, both in the Constitution and in commissions, writ-. .'. 
Sept. 1777, when an act of legislature directed tuo word State to be substituted 
for colony. 



133 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

And "the idea" of a "compact," " compromise," and 
"guaranty," in support of interminable despotism, for the 
purpose of bringing into the Union the States that were al- 
ready in the Union, and had been in it for about a dozen 
years, when the Constitution of 1787-9 came into being, is 
" an idea which evidently formed no part in the composition 
of {that) paper." 

We have heard Mr. Adams' testimony that the Declara- 
tion of Independence established a National Government for 
" the United States of America." Let us now hear his tes- 
timony concerning the character of the government then and 
thus established. 

" The elements and principles for the formation of a new government, 
were all contained in the Declaration of Independence, but the adjustment 
of them to the condition of the parties to the compact, was a work of 
time, of reflection, of experience, of calm deliberation, of moral and in- 
tellectual exertion." &c.—- Page 28. 

In other words, the Declaration of Independence compri- 
ses and embodies the fundamental " elements and princi- 
ples" of American Constitutional Law. The adoption of 
the "Articles of Confederation," first, and of the " Consti- 
tution" of 17S7-9, afterwards, are to be regarded in the 
light of "exertions" for the "adjustment" and proper ap- 
plication of these great principles of Constitutional Law. 
These principles, asserted in the original Declaration of 
1776, when the nation came into existence, continue to con- 
stitute now, (as they always have done, and will continue 
to do) the vital essence, the pith, the marrow, and the sub- 
stance, of our Constitutional Law. The mere outward form, 
the minutely detailed provisions of the subsequently written 
Constitution — these are but the instruments, of which those 
principles are the living spirit and substance. To accept of 
the former as a substitute for the latter, and to their exclu- 
sion, would be to accept of the shell, and throw the kernel 
away — to idolize the instrument and spurn the blessings it 
was intended to procure for us. Let us hear from Mr. 
Adams again. 

"The Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact 
on the foundation of the Redeemer's mission on earth. It laid the corner 
stone of human government on the first principles of Christianity." — Page 6. 

How could it do this, if its authority were not to be recog- 
nized, as comprising fundamental Constitutional Law ? 
Speaking still of the Declaration, Mr. Adams says, again : 

"For the first time since the creation of the world, the act which con- 
stituted a great people, laid the foundation of their govern- 
ment upon the unalterable and eternal principles of human rights." 



CHAP. V. — DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE. 139 

That which "constitutes" and "laya the 'ion of 

government" — must be called a Constitution of gm 

so long as words are used to signify things and convey 
ideas.* One extract more must suffice. 

"The Declaration itself did not even announce tlm States a> 
but as united, free, and independent, as having power to do all ac 
things which independent States may of right do. It ack there- 

fore, a rule of right, PARAMOUNT to the power of indepen 
and virtually disclaiming all power to DO WRO iG.f This u., 
in the moral philosophy of nations, and it is the essential poi 
ence between the system of government announced in the Declaration 
of Independence, and those systems which had until then prevailed among 
men.]: A moral Ruler of the Universe, the Governor and Controller of all 
human power, is the only unlimited Sovereign acknowledged by tin* De- 
claration of Independence, and it claims for the United States of America, 
when assuming their equal station among the nations of the earth, only 
the power to do all that may be done of right. '•— Page 26. 

How much of a "compact," "compromise," toleration, or 
"guaranty" in favor of slavery — the acknowledged "sum 
of all villanies" — may be made and entered into, " of right," 
we need not stop to inquire. No person of sane mind and 
sound morals could mistake so plain and palpable a point. 
Nor will any one worth arguing with, or answering, pretend 
that there can be constitutional or legal slavery in any State, 
Province, District, or Territory, where our American "De- 
claration" of self-evident truths, and of inalienable human 
rights is to be regarded as holding the authority of Consti- 
tutional Law. 

The courts of Massachusetts have settled that question, 
long ago; and the same Declaration of self-evident truths 
that makes slavery illegal and unconstitutional in Massa- 
chusetts, makes it illegal and unconstitutional in the District 
of Columbia, and in Georgia, and throughout all the "Uni- 
ted States of America" — by whom that Declaration was 
made. 

In further confirmation of our doctrine of the supreme and 
paramount authority of the Declaration of Independence 
over all our other Constitutions and laws, we have another 
high authority to cite. 

* Whether Mr. Adams would agree with us in callins, it a Constitution, wc can 
not say. But we insist that he has stated the fact correctly, end that tl 
ktence of such a fact is equivalent to the existence of ;t constitution of civil 
government. If our premises are attested by those who dissent from our con- 
clusions, the proof of those premises is so much the stronger ; and of our con- 
clusions, our readers will judge for themselves. 

f Mr. Adams had previously noticed and repudiated the doctrine <>f British 
lawyers that " sovereignty is identical with unlimited and illimitable power" 
'' the principle, the resistance to which was the vital spark of t., 
revolutionary cause." 

Jin this sentence, you may substitute the words Constitution and Constitutions 
in the place of system and systems, without changing the meaning ; that '», if 
iNoah Webster knew the meaning of the words. See his Dictionary, as before 
quoted. 



140 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

In 1320, the Hon. John C. Spencer said in the New York Legislature — 
" I contend that the first act of our nation (the Declaration of Indepen- 
dence,) being a solemn recognition of the liberty and equality of all men, 
and that the rights of liberty and happiness are inalienable— was the 
corner stone of our confederacy — and is above all Constitutions, and all 
Laws." 

The Alternative. — The Declaration of Independence, 
if the act of separate states, equally fatal to legal 

SLAVERY. 

So far as the illegality of slavery in the United States is 
concerned, it will not materially change the result, if we 
take, by way of supposition and as a basis of argument, the 
theory concerning State sovereignty and the Federal Govern- 
ment, the most opposite to the one that has just been main- 
tained. 

We will suppose then that the Declaration of Indepen- 
dence had been the declaration of separate, disunited States; 
each State acting by and for itself alone. To make the case 
as strong as possible, we will suppose that on or about the 
4th of July, 1776, there had been no "Continental Con- 
gress," but that each separate colony in its separate Con- 
gress assembled, had promulgated its Declaration of Inde- 
pendence, of self-evident truths, of inalienable human rights, 
and of separation from Great Britain, for the object of es- 
tablishing governments based on those fundamental princi- 
ples or truths, and for the security of those rights. 

In that case we should have had, (in these thirteen sepa- 
rate Declarations of Independence, of self-evident truths, of 
human rights, and of the establishment of new governments 
on the basis of those truths and rights,) thirteen distinct con- 
stitutions of government, of the same character with the Con- 
stitution of Massachusetts, which abolished slavery in that 
State. Such being the fact, the Federal Convention of 17S7 
could have found no legal slavery in existence to form a 
"compact" or " compromise" about — to " guaranty" or to 
tolerate. 

And even if we should not insist upon the technicality of 
a " Constitution" or of " Constitutional Law," (either State 
or National,) in this matter — the same result will not be vi- 
tally changed. It will still be true that there is no legal 
slavery in any one of the thirteen original States, and con- 
sequently none in the new States growing out of them, or 
founded by them. 

Whether the act of a State be called a Constitution, or a 
statute, an ordinance or a declaration, it nevertheless remains 
an act of the State, and carries with it the authority and 
'power of the State. And since no one disputes that on the 
4th of July, 1776, the Declaration of Independence, sofami- 



CHAP. V. — DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE. Ill 

liar to us all, was actually made by the thirteen States, it 
foilows that by the power of that act, SLAVERY WAS 
ABOLISHED in each and every one of tho> and 

has been illegal ever since, because slaves, once en 
ted, can not be re-enslaved by any subsequent act. No 
supposes that Massachusetts, Connecticut, or New-York, 
could now legally reduce again to slavery the persons or the 
posterity of those whom^hey have once emancipated. And 
the more strongly the slave States insist that the Declara- 
tion of Independence must be considered the act of the sepa- 
rate sovereign States, and not the unitedz.z\ of the "People" 
of the United States, northern and sonthern, the more strong- 
ly do they claim the glorious act of the abolition of sla- 
very, in 1776, as their own act ; the less cause will they 
have of complaint, as though it were forced upon them by 
stress of circumstances and by the urgency or the overpow- 
ering predominancy of northern votes ; and at all events, 
and in either case, they may congratulate themselves that 
the act of emancipation was drafted by one of their most 
honored citizens, so that they should not feel themselves ag- 
grieved if "full faith and credit shall be given, in each 
State, to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of 
every other State," agreeably to the provision of the Fede- 
ral Constitution, Article 4, Section 1. 

The "Declaration," never repudiated by the slave 
States, is still binding upon them. 

Whatever theory we adopt, therefore, it remains true that 
there has been no legal slavery in the United States since 
the 4th of July, 1776. Having been abolished then, there is 
no power, or authority, either State or National, that could 
have established it since. There is nothing, either in the 
Articles of Confederation of 1778, or in the Constitution of 
1787-9, that even professes to have done so, or that recog- 
nizes the legality of any slavery then existing. By no pub- 
lic act did either of the thirteen States that put forth the De- 
claration ot Independence, in 1776, signify to the Nation or 
to the world their renunciation of that Declaration, or of any 
truth, principle, or doctrine contained in it, or their desire 
to be considered as not being bound by it, up to the time of 
the framing and ratification of the Federal Constitution : no : 
nor have they done so, from that day to this! Having as- 
sented to the Federal Constitution without any such renun- 
ciation, disclaimer, or repudiation of their emancipation act 
of 1766, it ill becomes any of the States to complain that 
their most honorable act is considered as binding upon them 



142 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

now ; and that they should be expected, (according to the 
express provision of the Constitution of 17S7-9, which th^y 
assisted to frame and having* ratified) to maintain " a repuL- 
licanjorm of Government " in accordance with .the definition 
of such government, which their own Declaration of Inde- 
pendence, of self-evident truths, and of inalienable human 
rights, is well known to contain. The world and the Nation 
have a fair right to hold them bojund by their act of 1776, 
and to consider and treat all the slavery existing since that 
date as existing in violation of law, and of their own most 
solemn declarations and plighted faith. Having adopted the 
Federal Constitution without any repudiation of their former 
declarations and principles, the public sentiment of the civi- 
lized world should require of them that they construe that 
Constitution in accordance with those principles, and abide 
by its provisions, as thus construed. 



CHAPTER VI. 
OF SLAVERY UNDER COLONIAL AUTHORITY. 

ITS LEGALITY QUESTIONED. 

By what authority, or by what right, did the colonists or 
the colonial legislature maintain slavery? Was that autho- 
rity derived from the Crown, Parliament, Judiciary or usa- 
ges of Great Britain ? If not, from whence was it derived, 
while the colonies recognized their colonial obligations to 
the parent State? They claimed no right of sovereignty, 
then. 

It will hardly be maintained, except "by the school of Mc~ 
Duffle, that the right of slaveholding, or of enacting slave 
laws, is derived from the law of nature or of divine revcla- 
tion. No lawyer ever thought of going io\.h.e %i Common Law" 
for a warranty of slavery or of slave laws. 

Undoubtedly the claim was, and is, that slavery was sanc- 
tioned and legalized by the parent State. A standing apo- 
logy for American slavery has been found in the fact that 
English slavers, were permitted by the British Government, 
to visit the colonies, with cargoes of slaves. This has even 
been called forcing their slavery upon us, just as though we 
were obliged to buy what the slavers were permitted to offer 
us. The original draft of the Declaration of Independence, 
by Mr. Jefferson, made it one of the grave charges of the 
colonies against the King of Great Britain, and one of the 
proofs that he was a tyrant, and not fit to govern a free peo- 
ple, that he permitted this traffic to be carried on. 



CHAP. VI. — OF COLONIAL SLAVERY. r 1 H 

If there be any force or propriety in complain la oft! 
ture against the Government of Great Britain, il 
because the legality of slavery in the mother country made 
it difficult or impracticable for the colonial authorities ti 
clare it illegal. 

But slavery in England was abolished in the judicial de- 
cision of Somerset's case by Lord Mansfield in 1772. It 
was abolished on the broad principles of Common I. 
decision therefore was, that slavery never had been legal, in 
England ! It was, in fact, a re-affirming of an old decision, 
in the case of Gal way versus Caddee, before Baron Thomp- 
son, at Guildhall, as early as 1699, thirty years previous to 
the counter-opinion of York and Talbot, in 172^.* 

As slavery, therefore, never had been legal in England, how 
could it ever have been legal in the colonies ? The colonists 
brought the Common Law of England to this country with 
them, and their recognition of it, as a rule of judicial pro- 
ceedings, was among their most cherished rights. If slavery 
was illegal in England, because it was contrary to the Com- 
mon Law, how could it be legal in the colonies, where the 
authority of the same Common Law was recognized ? And 
if the English courts could discover and decide its illegality, 
why could not the colonia-1 courts do the same ? And why 
were they not bound to do it, as well as the courts in Eng-' 
land ? The Common Law declares that " human laws are 
of no validity if contrary to the law of nature, which is coe- 
val with mankind, and dictated by God himself." If this 
principle was permitted to be recognized, even at the court 
of King's Bench, is it credible that there was any authority 
in colonial legislation too high and too sacred to bow to the 
same principle when enforced by a colonial court 1 

Whatever plea of deference to English decisions might 
have availed for the colonies or their courts, up to 1772, the 
memorable decision of that period left them without that ex- 
cuse afterwards.! Chief Justice Shaw, of Massachusetts, 
in his opinion on the case of the Commonwealth vs. Thomas 
Aves, [vide Pickering's Reports, page 209-10, already quo- 
ted,] is inclined to think that the judicial abolition of s!a- 

* Vide C. Stuart's life of Granville Sharpe, page 65. 

t It may be pleaded, perhaps, that the delay of Great Britain, until 1807, wholly 
to prohibit the foreign slave-trade, and until very recently lo abolish hei 
nial slavery, prevented the judicial decision of IT3 

land, from being held as a precedent, by the colonies. This criminal </t 
Great Britain we should neither excuse nor imitate, as we should do, we 
longer, as a nation to permit, in any portion of our empirr, a violation i 
great National " compact " of 1776. But why was the interference of tl. 
tish Parliament needed, in the matter of ber colonial slavery, but treatise the 
colonial courts failed to follow, as they should have done, the precedent of 
the Somerset case? The fact that English soil was kept free from si iverj while 
it existed in the West Indies, proves that Virginia soil might have been. 



144 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

very in that State, soon after the Revolution, may have been 
made " by the adoption of the opinion in Somerset's case, as 
a declaration and modification of the Common Law." If an 
American court, might do this after the separation from 
Great Britain, why not before? 

These questions will have been understood as preparatory 
to another, viz: Whether there was any legal slavery in the 
colonies during the four years from Y772 to 1776 ? 

If there was, then the Common Law permitted in the col- 
onies, what the same Common Law would not permit in the 
mother country. If there was not, then there is no legal sla- 
very in the United States of America noiv, unless the De- 
claration of Independence, and the glorious Revolution have 
introduced it again, or stood sentinel against the Common 
Law, to prevent it from discharging its proper functions ! 
And if this may be believed, what may we refuse to be- 
lieve ? 

But on these points we shall not stop to insist. We leave 
it for the lawyers to decide. Such of them as can find legal- 
ity in slavery any where, may contrive to find it every where, 
for aught we can tell. 

Whoever would discover the legality of slavery must pur- 
sue his inquiries further back ihan the Constitution of '87 
— the Declaration of '76 — or the decision of '72. On the 
coast of Africa, and in the perpetration of deeds which, if 
proved in a Court of Justice, would swing up the perpetra- 
tors, as pirates, to the yard-arm, by the laws of all civilized 
nations, there it is, and to those acts that we must look, if 
any where, for the ground and origin of lawful slavery * 

And as to colonial authority, the question is not so much 
where the colonies could find authority and power enough 
to abolish their own slave laws — as where they could find 
authority and power enough to enact them ? Such autho- 
rity and power " the English Common Law." (the paramount 
law of the realm,) does not concede to the Monarch and 
Parliament of Great Britain. . 

* " Sir William Blackstone examines those causes of slavery 1 ' (crimes, cap- 
tivity and debt, as cited by Paley) " by the Civil Law, and shows them all to 
rest on unsound foundations, and he insists that a state of slavery is repugnant 
to reason, and the principles of natural law. The Civil Law admitted it to be 
contrary to natural right, though conformable to the usage of nations."— 
Kent's Commentaries, pa°c '2 17. 

[And since, by Common Law, "human laws are of no validity if contrary to 
the law of nature," the "usage of nations " can not make slavery legal.] 

" Opinion of Marshall, C. J. in the case of the Antelope, 10 Wheat 120. He 
is speaking of the slave-trade, but the remark itself shows that it applies to 
slavery. ' That it is contrary to the law of nature will scarcely be denied — 
That every man has a natural right to the fruit of his own labor, is generally 
admitted, and that, no other person can rightfully deprive him of those fruits, 
and appropriate them against his will, seems to be the necessary result of the 
admission.' "—Pickering's Reports, p. 211. Quoted in opinion o/C. J. Shaw, case 
of the Commonwealth vs. Thomas Ave*. 



CHAP. VII, — NATURE OF GOVERNMENT AND LAW. 1 U> 

Lord Brougham enjoys the highest reputation for legal 

learning. Let us hear him on this point. 

"Tell me not of rights, talk not of the property of the planter in hi« 
slaves. I deny the right. I acknowledge not the properly. Tin- prin- 
ciples, the feelings of our common nature rise in rebellion against it. He 
the appeal made to the understanding, or to the heart, the sentence is the 
same that rejects it. There is a law above all human enactments, writ- 
ten by the finger of God on the heart of man — and by that law, eternal 
and unchangeable, while men despise fraud and loathe rapine, and I 
"blood, they shall reject with indignation, the vild and guilty phantasy, 
that man can hold property in wksti." 

In strict accordance with this opinion of Brougham, was 
the decision of Judge Karwinton of Vermont, who affirmed 
that before the claimant of a fugitive slave could make his 
claim valid, he u must produce a bill of sale from the 
Almighty." 



CHAPTER VII. 

NATURE AND FOUNDATION OF GOVERNMENT 

AND LAW. 

Parchments, papers, precedents— Whence their authority ?— Compacts 
— on whom binding? — Government as an ordinance of God— The u social 
compact'' an exploded fiction— A more substantial theory needed— Where 
shall we find it?— Civil government a science; compared with other 
sciences— Has its foundatian in facts— Nature and relations of man— 
Scripture prophecy— First principles immutable— Can not be set aside 
by compacts and parchments — Recognized by Common Law— \\ hat i 
Common Law?— Whence its paramount power?— One universal law- 
Founded on the Divine Will— Constitution of civil government not arbi- 
trary—Absurdities can not become law— Law can not be created by 
man— ean only be discovered, obeyed, and applied— Harmony of our 
National documents with these principles— Objections considered. 

Parchments — Papers — Precedents, &c. 

We have been speaking of law — of government — of con- 
stitutions of government — of things legal and illegal. And, 
in doing this, we have hitherto been chiefly occupied in ex- 
pounding papers, parchments, documents, records of things 
done or agreed to be done, somewhere, and bv somebodv, 
before the greater part of the present generation were born. 
We have looked into books, cited authors, authorities, usages, 
precedents, customs. 

It is high time to ask ourselves whether this is all we 
know or may know, of law, government, constitution (or 
principle) of government — of the legality — illegality — vali- 
dity — or nullity of statutes or enactments claimed to be laws. 

10 



146 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

Does the pith and gist of the matter lie in the paper — the 
parchment? Or lies it in something beyond, or back of the 
parchment, or the paper ? Have we fou.d the thing, when 
we have found the parchment, the paper, or have we found 
only what purports to be a statement, a description of the 
thing itself? 

If there should happen to be a mistake in the paper, — if 
there should be knavery or stupidity, or accidental blunder 
in the printer or penman of the document, have we no re- 
medy but to take it as it is, for better or for worse ? Are 
there no things, to which we can gain access, ourselves, to 
correct the blunders that may have been made, by others? 
If not, who can tell whether or no the printers, the penmen, 
or those who set them at work, had access to any such ve- 
ritable realities, themselves, or whether they spun the whole 
web out of their own brains ? 

Compacts — On whom Binding ? 

And whence the binding authority of laws, constituiions, 
and governments ? You prove to me that a certain " com- 
pact" was made some fifty years ago, while I was an infant, 
or before I was born. You authenticate to me the fact. 
Very well. But how does that fact bind me, who had no 
part in the bargain ? If, as is often said, the whole authority 
of civil government is founded in " compact," how can that 
authority be binding on any persons except those by whom 
the compact was made ? Suppose I do not choose to come 
into the " compact," what have its provisions to do wihTTze? 
My being born in the country where the " compact" was 
made does not render me a party to the compact. I had a 
right to be born when and where my Creator saw fit, and 
am not beholden to the makers of paper compacts for my 
right to be where Divine Providence has placed me, and to 
be a man, on my own proper account and behoof. My good 
fatheror grandfather, (peace to their ashes,) may have signed 
the compact, as they had a right to do, if they saw fit. But 
they stood in their own shoes, and I stand in mine — as truly 
a man as either of them, with the same unimpaired powers — 
with the same high responsibilities to my Creator, to my 
country, and to my race, that they had. They had no power 
to make me less of an independent man, and a voluntary 
free agent, than they were themselves. And they have 
not done it. 

Thus, at least, men will reason, (and have reasoned,) 
when they wish to throw off the obligations, either of civil 
government in general, or the particular government they 



CHAP. VII. NATURE OF GOVERNMENT AND LAW. 147 

Jive under, or any enactments which they think oppressive, 
or which they dislike. And it might be very convenient to 
have something more logical to confute them with, than 
papers and precedents, something more august to overawe 
them than full bottomed wigs, (now grown into disuse) 
something more satisfactory than gibbets, something more 
philosophical and more Christian than powder and ball, 
especially when wielded as substitutes for the right, instead 
of instruments of suppressing the wrong. 

And most manifestly, civil government must have some 
other and higher authority than " mere compart" if we 
would claim for it tr.e reverence due to " an ordinance of 
God." 

* Social Compact" a Fiction, &c 

The date, moreover, and the locality of that great town- 
meeting of the human race, in which it was agreed to emerge 
from w a state of nature" and " enter civil society" with " a 
part of their rights surrendered for the better protection of 
the rest" — (as the old legend hath it,) is a matter that the 
paper and parchment records have never yet reached. The 
recent explosion of that wretched fiction of the old writers 
of civic romance, has left a vacuum in the theory of govern- 
ment, as existing in the literature of the age, which it is high 
time to fill up with substantial truth, if the high obligations 
of government and of law are to retain any hold upon the 
•ever progressive popular mind. 

Who can tell us whether there be any such substantial 
truth to inculcate, unless our conceptions of government, of 
•constitution and of law, can run back of mere libraries and 
precedents, of legislative enactments, of legal decisions, of 
conventional agreements, and fasten hold of something of 
which all these are but the exponents, the declarations, the 
expressiwis? 

Civil Government, a Science, &c. 

In every other department of human activity and of human 
science, it is expected that the operator and the student 
should be able to fix his grasp upon something in the form of 
fixed realities, besides the mere papers and books that pro- 
fess to give him an account of them. He is expected to exa- 
mine the things for himself, and to use his parchment only 
as means to facilitate this examination. Why should the 
science of government be an exception ? 

The practical mariner, with his chart of the Indian Ocean 
before him, never mistakes his chart for the ocean itself. 



14S AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

He explores the ocean, with its rocks, reefs, and islands, by 
the help of his chart, but never gives the credit to his chart 
of being more correct than the ocean, when he finds reefs 
and islands in the latter, that are not laid down in the for- 
mer ! He does not substitute the paper description of the 
thing for the thing itself. Why should the ship of State be 
guided by a petty pedantry that would be derided by the 
rudest sailor before the mast? With eyes to survey the 
great "self evident truths" of political science, why should 
statesmen or jurists, deserving the name, run the common- 
wealth, (committed, with all its vast interests into their 
hands, as pilots) into the midst of the thick breakers and 
rocky reefs, plain insight before them, merely because they 
can not find them marked out distinctly, on 'their antiquated 
paper charts ? 

What would be thought of the mathematician who should 
identify the sciences of arithmetic, or geometry, or algebra, 
with his book, his approved and highly authoritative book on 
those subjects ? Who should never speak of " arithmetic" 
with any higher meaning to the word than the book he holds 
in his hands? But such a village pedagogue, could we 
find one, would well deserve a place beside the grave sena- 
tor, or the learned judge of the Supreme Court, who has no 
higher meaning to the phrase, " the Constitution of the 
United States" than the written or printed parchment or 
paper, agreed upon, and drawn up by the Convention that 
assembled in 1787 — forgetful that a Constitution of Govern- 
ment, like a theorem in algebra, or a fact in chemistry or 
botany, or zoology, or astronomy, is a palpable, veritable, 
existing 'fact, whether any books or papers have described 
them correctly, or undertaken to describe them at all. 

And this opens before us another series of questions — 
which the present generation will have to decide upon, and 
in the decision settle the destinies of their country perhaps 
for ages to come. Their decision will not alter the facts 
and principles upon which they are called to decide. But 
it will fix the condition of the Republic, by determining its 
adjustment to those unchangeable principles and facts. 

Nature and relations of Man. 

The problem may be stated in some such queriesas these 
— Is there, after all, any thing in the social nature of man % 
in the relations of man to man, in the duties growing out of 
those relations, (duties therefore, imposed upon man by the 
Author of his being,) which lay a foundation, (as they create 
a moral necessity) for such a science as that of civil govern- 



CHAP. VII. NATURE OF GOVERNMENT AND LAW. 110 

ment, a science as fixed and determinate, in the nature of 
things, as any of the other demonstrative sciences, based 
upon •' self-evident truths :" a science no more to be altered 
by parchments, or conventional arrangements or precedents, 
than the sciences which enable the persons acquainted with 
them to traverse land and ocean by steam — a science which 
written constitutions, enacted statutes, and recorded deci- 
sions, can more or less correctly or incorrectly describe, (or 
perchance contradict,) but can never alter nor change. 

Unless there be such a science of legislation and of law, 
which mankind can be taught, can understand, and can 
apply, then civil government itself becomes a cheat, and 
legislation becomes a farce, and jurisprudence becomes an 
usurpation, which the onward and rapid march of mankind 
must speedily detect, and woe to the conservators of a law 
and a government that shall prove themselves to be such 
contemptible shams, then. 

Scripture Prophecy — Principles Immutable. 

If the period ever arrives — (and the harp of prophecy 
hath hymned it — the plighted word of Jehovah hath spoken 
it) — that the kingdoms of this world, shall become the king- 
doms of our Lord and of his Christ — controlled by his 
righteous laws, wielded for the fulfilment of his benevolent 
purposes of equity, mercy, peace on earth and good will to 
man, that period will be ushered in by a correct knowledge 
arid an honest application of those first principles of civil 
government which are as immutable and as moveless as 
the throne of God himself, which recorded precedents can 
no more modify than they can the courses of the stars, 
which conventional compacts can no more eclipse or blot 
out, than they can the sun and the moon, which enacted 
statutes can no more repeal than they can the laws of gra- 
vitation, which judicial decisions can no more cancel or set 
aside, than they can the downward rush of the torrent, or 
the flight of the winged lightnings of heaven. The king- 
doms, or the pretended republics that will not horfor these 
principles, identical with the laws of God, shall come to 
naught, those nations shall utterly be wasted. They shall 
be wearied with their own way, and filled with the fruit of 
their own doings. But the meek shall inherit the earth. 
The upright will he guide in his way, and bv righteous- 
ness (a practical regard to the right) shall the nations of 
the saved be exalted. 

To conceptions of civil government thus spiritual and 
sublime, by what means, by the use of what symbols, shall 



150 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

the present generation of statesmen and jurists be raised ? 
Deep buried under huge folios of precedentsjand of records, 
of technicalities and of conventionalisms, in the fog of ever 
calculating but never calculated expedients and expedien- 
cies, in the slough of never ending bargains and barters, in 
which the needy are sold for a pair of shoes and the fruit of 
righteousness turned into hemlock, — with what parchments, 
with what papers, with what documents, with what records, 
with what enactments, with what decisions — save those of 
the Sacred Scriptures, that they trample under their hoofs, 
shall such a generation of jurists and statesmen be reached? 

Common Law, secret of its power. 

The volumes of the Common Law, doubtless, embodied 
and reechoed as they are in our own Declaration of Inde- 
pendence, and in the Preamble of the Federal Constitu- 
tion, technically so called, come the nearest to the instru- 
mentalities we are seeking, of any thing within our reach. 
Our jurists, (aye, and our statesmen for the most part,) have 
heard of the Common Law, and have learned something of 
its authority and power. And the very soul of the Common 
Law is identical with the fundamental truths we would 
insist upon. 

Tor what is the CommortfLaw, the highest standard of 
appeal in our civil courts — the Common Law, that corrects 
hoary abuses, reverses judicial decisions, annuls statutes, 
revises charters, repeals parchments, abashes omnipotent 
parliaments with its presence, and annihilates royal prero- 
gatives with a nod — the Common Law, that Luther like, looks 
confederate emperors in the face, and to their most autho- 
ritative mandates answers, calmly, " No !'' The Common 
Law that stepping into the Court of King's Bench, and 
taking up the slave code, avers, solemnly p.nd decisively 
that there is not power nor authority enough in the British 
Government, Kings, Lords, Commons, Judiciary and all, to 
make that iniquitous code, legal ! that says this, and is 
obeyed 1 

From what source is this mighty and resistless power of 
the Common Law derived ? Did King and Parliament that 
are overawed in its presence, at any time, enact the autho- 
rity they hate, and before which they cower ? When Com- 
mon Law would present its credentials, does it show a 
commission signed by the dignified officials on the bench 
to whom it gives law, and whom it claims as its servants? 

Or is it to the book makers, the compilers, the learned 
recorders, the writers, the printers, the publishers, or the 



CHAP. VII. NATURE OF GOVERNMENT AND LAW. L31 

hawkers, of Common Law maxims, that we must look, for 
the sources of the high authority with which they are 
clothed ? 

Let us open our eyes to the fact that the Common Law- 
is superior, and paramount, and prior to all these — that sh«? 
" teaches as one having authority, and not as the scribes' 1 — 
the mere copyists or commentators of parchments — that she 
speaks in her own name, or rather, in the name of universal , 
essential, uncreated, unalterable law, or in other words, in 
the name of the most high and eternally supreme God. 

Common Law has power, not because it is printed in cer- 
tain antique volumes of sheep-skin, that the librarians pre- 
serve and that the courts reverence, but because it is the 
voice of the Creator, speaking through the human nature he 
has created — the voice of human conscience and of common 
sense, uttered and engraven by human suffering and human 
necessity, demanding justice, equity, redress of wrongs, at 
the hands of those who undertake to govern men, and de- 
manding it with an importunity that has forced open the 
ears and subdued the spirits even of unjust judges that fear 
not God, nor regard man. Such in a word (instead of a 
volume) is an epitome of what might be denominated by 
way of title page, the " natural history of the Common Law," 
— a history by no means confined to the Anglo-Saxons, but 
coeval with the history of man's struggles for his rights, 
the world over. Even in China itself, there is a Common 
Law* that the Emperor may not annul — that the Emperor 
must needs obey. 

One Universal Law. 

An expansion and purification of this idea of Common 
Law may introduce to us, the one universal law — the law of. 
nature, sometimes termed — under which all nations are 
placed — a law from which civilization and the social state 
does not release men — a law which it is the sole business of 
civil government to ascertain and enforce, in the execution 
of justice, between a man and his neighbor. "The rightful 
power of all legislation," says Thomas Jefferson, " is to de- 
clare and enforce only our natural rights and duties, and 
take none of them from us. When the laws have declared 
and enforced all this, they have fulfilled their functions." 
This universal law, then, is the only law. Whatever con- 
flicts with this, is to be repudiated (as say likewise the wri- 

* In the parlance of the Canton merchants — " old custom" — founded on com- 
mon notions of equity— which the mandarins or magistrates are expected to 
see enforced. This Common Law of China goes far to counterbalance and bold 
in check the otherwise unlimited despotism of that empire. 



152 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

ter3 on Common Law) "not as being bad law, but as being 
no law!" Hence, nothing subversive of' equity deserves 
the name of.'aw, or is to be treated as law, by any of the 
officers, the Judges, or the executors of law. There is, and 
there can be, no valid or binding law, at variance with jus- 
tice or equity, either on earth or in heaven. 

Source of Law, in the Divine Will. 

Power belongeth unto God. All rightful rule and author- 
ity are from him. By bestowing social and moral existence 
on men, he has, of necessity, imprinted the law of that so- 
cial and mor*l existence upon them. By giving them the 
nature they possess, he has bound them by the law of that 
nature. By establishing the relations they sustain to each 
other, he has indicated the duties they owe to each other. 
Among these duties is the duty of the COMMUNITY (not 
a select portion of them) to see that the rights of each mem- 
her of the community are respected, and uninfringed. From 
the plagues of Egypt to the present hour, the universal his- 
tory of the providential government of God, over the nations, 
attests this great truth, that it is the MASSES and not the 
officials merely, of the nations, that God and nature hold re- 
sponsible for the executing of just, judgment. Fealty to 
justice, not to parchments is the constant burden of his re- 
quisitions. 

Constitution of Government not Arbitrary. 

If this be a truthful account of civil government, then the 
Constitution of civil government has a foundation in nature 
— that is to say, in the Divine Will. It is an existing mat- 
ter of fact, as much so as is the constitution of the human 
body. Of the latter, the physiologists, (Dr. Combe for ex- 
ample) may hive given a more or less reliable account, in 
the books they may have written. Of the former, the Con- 
vention of 1787 may have traced more or less correctly the 
outlines, and indicated the appropriate details. In the 
former case, an individual, in the latter case, a convention, 
and afterwards an entire nation, assumed the responsibility 
of the statements. Both are statements and not creations, 
nevertheless. The Federal Convention, and " we the Peo- 
ple of the United States" could no more make a Constitu- 
tion of civil government, out of a cloth of our own fabric, 
and upo?i any principles that might suit our own selfishness 
or caprice — a Constitution that should be valid and binding; 
than Dr. Combe and an university of physiologists could 
?vake, at their own whim or pleasure, a constitution of the 



CHAP. VII. NATURE OF GOVERNMENT AND LAW. ];")'.) 

human body, that should be binding upon all the anatomists 
and surgeons of a nation, or on all who should have occa- 
sion to contract their muscles, and move their limbs! In 

both cases, it is God who has made the constitutions. All 
that men in either case can do, is to learn, to teach, and to 
use them. 

As much as this, the Common Law savs, when it denies 
that human authorities can make wicked and unjust laws, 
that can be binding- and valid. As much as this, the Deda- 
ration of Independence, by obvious implication says, when it 
claims for the new Republic the power to " do all arts and 
things which independent States may, of right, do." As 
much as this, the Preamble of the Federal Constitution re- 
cognizes, and the same is supposed in the provision to cor- 
rect its own mistaken statements of ''justice" by "amend- 
ments" of its provisions. 

Absurdities can not become Law. 

Why should any men stultify themselves, or degrade br 
broad caricature, the claims and prerogatives of that civil 
government they would teach men to respect, by inculcating 
the reverse of this doctrine ? How would they have us re- 
gard a provision of a paper Constitution that incidentally 
(byway of describing a boundary line, for example) should 
bid us locate the river Ohio west of the Missouri, or the 
Rocky Mountains east of the Mississippi? Would our 
judges and jurors, in all coming time, be obliged thus to 
regard and describe them? Suppose there were a consti- 
tutional "compact" or a legislative enactment, that the three 
angles of every right angled triangle should be " deemed, 
taken, reputed, and adjudged in law to be" equal to seven 
right angles, would the provision be binding ? Could it be 
made " Constitutional Law?" Suppose it were provided 
that all elephants should henceforth be mice, and that men 
should henceforth be things — immortal spirits, chattels per- 
sonal I Could either of those provisions become law? To 
say so, would be to deny the distinctive characteristics of law 
itself ; to say that it is not to be defined either by order, by 
fitness, by truthfulness, or by iule:-Mhat it is, in no wav. 
distinguishable from waywardness, from falsehood, from 
lawlessness, from caprice ! 

Man may discover, but not create, Law. 

The alchymists of the dark ages supposed it possible to 
obtain by compound, a substance, which they called the 
philosopher's stone, the touch of which should transmit: e 
whatever it touched into gold ! We smile and wonder at 



154 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

their folly, and we may justly claim that, except in the sci- 
ence of jurisprudence, the world has made some creditable 
progress, since the times of the alchymists. But in the midst 
of the nineteenth century, under the light of the Christian 
Scriptures, in the presence of the Common Law, and almost 
seventy years after the glorious American Declaration of 
self-evident truths, and inalienable human rights, it is still 
held and maintained by grave and learned men, that certain 
pieces of parchment or paper, emanating from certain places, 
and prepared by certain hands, possess the power of trans- 
muting whatever folly or selfishness may have been pleased 
to write upon them into valid and authoritative law I Have 
power to counteract creative wisdom and goodness, by trans- 
forming an immortal man into a thing! Compared with 
this dream of the jurists of the nineteenth century, the 
dreams of the alchymists of the eleventh century may al- 
most be pronounced philosophical as well as harmless. 

The time, however, can not be far distant, when these 
matters will be better understood — when legislative and 
judicial halls will be occupied in the rational task of learn- 
ing, declaring, and applying to the affairs of men, the great 
principles of eternal, immutable law, rather than in vain at- 
tempts, either to create, or to annul it. To establish a 
manufactory and to commission manufacturers of laws for 
the government of the solar system, laws for the government 
of mineral, vegetable, or animal existences, chemical laws, 
or laws of hydrostatics ; all this might pass for a rational 
amusement (as it seems indeed to have been the amusement 
of philosophers, before Lord Bacon's time) in the compari- 
son with the still current usage of attempting to manufac- 
ture Constitutional Law, the law by which the social re- 
lation of man, in political communities, must be governed ! 
When shall the inductive instead of the constructive and 
hypothetical philosophy be applied to the science of govern- 
ment i When will men see that they can only discover 
and obey, not construct, the laws of the political world ! 
That their paper constitutions can only teach and declare, 
not originate, the fundamental principles of a civil govern- 
ment! 

To the case in hand. Human beings can no more con- 
struct a civil government, with binding authority over hu- 
man beings, yet without the power to " execute judgment 
between a man and his neighbor," than they can construct 
a globe without the quality of roundness, or a cube without 
its six sides. Abortions and absurdities they may multiply 
as they please. "There is no authority but of God," and 



CHAP. VII. NATURE OF GOVERNMENT AND LAW. Iff 

the authorities that be (that truly possess anv binding au- 
thority) " are ordained of God." These " are a terror not to 
good works, but to the evil." They are "the minsters of 
God" "attending continually upon this very thing,'! and on 
no other ground, and in no other character, can they light- 
fully claim to be recognized, or deserve the "tribute" of 
support. [Paul, in Rom. XIII, 1— 9.J A Constitution of 
civil government, therefore, that tolerates slavery, is an ab- 
surdity that can not exist. 

Our National Documents. 
With these plain principles of common sense, of Common 
Law, and of our common Christianity, the national docu- 
ments of our common country, in the main, happily har- 
monize. Our Declaration of Independence and the Consti- 
tution of 1787-9 taken as members of each other, consider- 
ed as a whole, and construed by its spirit, constitute a credit- 
able statement of Constitutional Law, and even without the 
amendments of which they are susceptible, are amply suffi- 
cient in their provisions, for either the legislative or judi- 
cial abolition of slavery. An oath to support the Constitu- 
tion of the United States is an oath to promote "justice" and 
secure "liberty," an oath to adhere to its "self-evident truths" 
and vindicate inalienable human rights. The legislator 
perjures himself who takes this oath and refuses to legis- 
late against slavery. The judge perjures himself who takes 
this oath, and does not, when the opportunity offers, proclaim 
deliverance to the captive. 

Objections Considered. 

It has been said by some of the friends of the enslaved* 
that in our political efforts in their behalf, we must not at- 
tempt to wield powers of government not conceded to us by 
those expositors of the Constitution whom the Constitution 
itself provides (to wit,) the Judges of the Supreme Court — 
that we must give to the Constitution the same construction 
they give it, in the active exertions we put put forth. But 
what if Mq/have construed it ivrong ? Are our consciences 
to be bound by theirs? Or may the judicial department 
dictate beforehand, to'the legislative ? May n t u member 
of Congress in the discharge of his duty, vote for the aboli- 
tion of slaveryf as he understands his lawful powers, and 
throw upon the judges the responsibility of pronouncing the 
legislation unconstitutional, if they can ? And besides, for 
what object do the friends of God and humanity wield their 
political powers, in this grand struggle, but to rescue,t:rcry 
department of the government, the judicial, as well as the 



156 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

legislative and executive, from the polluting and withering 
touch of the slave power? Are not the People as truly re- 
sponsible for a sound judiciary as a sound legislature ? Is it 
not quite as essential for the security of their rights ? And 
does not the Constitution recognize in the PEOPLE the 
constitutional guardians even of the judiciary itself — the 
ultimate expositors of the Constitution ? "JUDGES and 
officers shalt thou make thee in all the gates which the Lord 
thy God givelh thee, throughout thy tribes, and they shall 
rule the people with just judgment."" If the present judges 
decide wrongfully, we must indeed submit to their decisions 
for the time being, though we must not assist in executing 
their unrighteous decisions, nor lose a moment's time in 
putting things in train for providing better successors in their 
place, whenever their seats shall be vacant. 

The views of law that have been presented will alarm 
some with the apprehension that they would tend to fluctu- 
ation and change — that conflicting views of justice and equity 
would besjet constant uncertainty and doubt. The very re- 
verse of all this is the truth. The u glorious uncertainty of 
the law" (so convenient to those who subsist on the spoils,) 
has grown into a proverb long ago. Who does not know 
that conflicting constructions of statutes and parchments, 
decisions versus decisions, precedents arrayed against prece- 
dents, and technicalities against common sense, have made 
law a vast game of hazard, now, and that a few maxims of 
that same Common Law we would exalt, constitute almost 
the only element of stability, of certainty, or of justice, that 
remain. On this point, and as a conclusion of the whole dis- 
cussion, we introduce a further extract from the correspon- 
dence of the Oberlin Anti-Slavery Committee with Hon. 
Wm. Andrews. 

'* It may be said that this rule makes every man his own constitution 
maker and law maker. There might be some force in this, if the law of 
God were some indefinite thing which man's arbitrary will might mould 
into any shape it pleased. But the principles of fundamental morality 
are more clearly and determinatelv laid down by ethical writers than the 
import of the Constitution of the Union by the sages of the law. Our 
public men could have all the motives for giving the divine law an honest 
interpretation which urgelhemto interpret the Constitution honestly. 
Mistakes might be committed which would need to be corrected by the 
courts, or by subsequent legislation ; but the general consequences would 
be a gradual improvement in the moral aspect of society. The fountain 
would be healthy and the stream salutary. Law would be venerable in the 
eyes of men, and the sublime words of Hooker would be no rhetorical 
flourish:— * Of LAW there can be no less acknowledged than that her 
seat is the bosom of God, her voice the harmony of the world: all things 
in heaven and earth do her homage, the VERY LEAST AS FEELING 
HER CARE, AND THE GREATEST AS NOT EXEMPTED FROM, 
HER POWER. Both angels and men, and creatures of what condition 
soever, though each in different sort and manner, yet all with uniform 
consent, admiring her, as the mother of their peace and joy.' » 



AUTHORITIES, & c . & c . 

List of Books, Documents, Pamphlets, Speeches, Writings, 

1 SfC, quoted, cited, or used in the preceding View. 

1. The ScriptureJ, as a standard of principles and ethics. 

2. Constitutional Law, comprising the Declaration of Independence, 
the Articles of Confederation, Constitution of the United States, and of 
the several Stales, &c. Washington ; Ga'es & Sealon, 1826. 

3. The Federalist on the New Constitution, by Hamilton, Madison, and 
Jay, written in the year 1788. 

4. Secret Proceedings and Debates of the Convention assembled at Phi- 
ladelphia, in 1787, for forming the Constitution of the United States, 
&c. FrOm notes by Robert Yates, Esq. Chief Justice of New York, 
and copied by John Lansing, Jr., late Chancellor of that State, mem- 
bers of that Convention. Albany : Webster & Skinners, 1S21 . 

5. Kent's Commentaries. 

6. Pickering's Reports. (Opinions of Judge Shaw and Judge Marshall.) 

7. Montesquieu's Spirit of Laws. 

8. Common Law. Hale's History of Common Law. Littleton's Inst. 
Wood's do. Coke's do. Noyes' Maxims. Chancellor Fortescue. 
Principia Legis et Equitatis— Jenks, Bracton. [Vide C. Stuart's Life 
of Granville Sharpe.] Hooker, Blackstone, Christian. 

9. C. Stuart's Life of Granville Sharpe. (Opinionsof York and Talbot— 
of Baron Thompson and Lord Chief Justice Mansfield.) 

10. Free Remarks, &c, respecting the Exclusion of Slavery from t! M 
Territories and New States. By a Philadclphian : 1819. 

11. Hon. William Jay. 1. Inquiry, &c. 2. View of the Action of tho 
Federal Government in behalf of Slavery. 

12. Letter of Gerrit Smith to Henry Clay. 

13. Theodore D. Weld. 1. Power of Congress over District of Colum- 
bia. 2. Tract on Fugitive Slaves. 

14. John Quincy Adams. 1. Speech in Congress on the War Power of 
the National Government over Slavery. 2. Oration at Newburyport, 
July 4, 1837. 

15. Ellis Gray Loring. Plea before C. J. Shaw, Massachusetts, in tho 
case of Commonwealth vs. Thomas Avcs. 183C. 

16. Alvan Stewart, Esq. 1. Constitutional Argument, vide Friend of 
Man, Oct. 18, 1837. 2. Address to the Liberty Party— Liberty Press, 
June 4, 1844. 



158 AUTHORITIES. 

17. Hon. Titus Hutchinson, Vermont. Address in Vermont Freeman, 
Dec. 2, 1813. 

18. Constitutional Argument, signed "Seventy-Six," in the Emancipa- 
tor, of Jan. 4, 1838. 

19. Ohio Resolutions. Resolutions of the A. S. Convention in Ohio, 
(attributed to Mr. Chase) Cincinnati Weekly Herald, 1844. Adopted 
also at Buffalo A. S. Convention, Sept. 1843. 

20. Ichabod Codding, in Charter Oak. Copied into American Freeman, 
March 20, 1844. 

21. Proceedings R. I. Anti-Slavery Convention, Feb. 1836. 

22. Full Statement, Sic, before the Committee of the Legislature of 
Massachusetts, by Anti-Slavery Committee. Boston, March, 1826. 

23. Anti-Slavery Lecturer, Utica, 1839. 

24. Liberty. Pamphlet, Albany, 1837. 

25. Slave Laws. Stroud's Sketch— Prince's Digest— Acts of Maryland, 
Tennessee, and Louisiana. 

26. Oberlin Anti-Slavery Committee. Correspondence with Hon. Wil- 
liam Andrews. 

27. Writings of Myron Holley. 

28. Eminent Statesmen, Civilians, &c Washington, Jefferson, Madison, 
Dr. Franklin, Judge Wilson, Gov. Randolph, Wm. Pinckney, John 
Jay, Gov. Pownal, Dr. Rush, Gen. Heath, Judge Story, Chief Justice 
Ellsworth, Judge Marshall, James G. Birney, Mr. Duponceau, HaH's 
Law Journal, Hawk's N. C. Reports, Chief Justice Taylor, Lord Chief 
Justice Holt, Lord Tenterton, John C. Spencer, Lord Brougham, 
Judge Harwinton, Sic. Sic Also, among slaveholding and pro-slave- 
ry statesmen, Sic B. Watkins Leigh, J. C. Calhoun, Henry Clay, 
Gov. McDuffie, Mr. Pickens, Mr. Hammond, Prof. Dew, Gen. Harri- 
son, Gov. Marcy, Gov. Everett, Mr. Upshur, Mr. Stevenson. 

29. Observations on the American Revolution, published by Congress* 
in 1779. 

30. The Madison papers. Posthumous writings of James Madison. 
H. E. Smith, Esq. 4th of July Address at West Gal way. 

32. Gcrrit Smith, Esq. Constitutional Argument. 

33. W. II. Burleigh, Esq. Editor Christian Freeman. 

34. S. P. Chase, Esq.— in Cincinnati Herald. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



INTRODUCTION. Page. 

Sure triumphs of truth — Former Construction of the British Consti- 
tution, by York, Talbot, Blackstone, and Mansfield. New Con- 
struction, involved in the decision of Lord Mansfield, in the 
Somerset case. Revolution in English Jurisprudence. Secret 
of that Revolution. Granville Sharpe. Origin and foundation of 
law, immutable and eternal 3 

CHAPTER I. 
The Question at Issue. 
Its meaning and its magnitude. Impossibility of evasion. Testimo- 
ny of American Statesmen. No middle ground. Illustrative 
politics of the country. State action. Action of the Federal 
Government. The Alternative 7 

CHAPTER II. 

Strict Construction. The Constitution of 1787-9, considered 

on the principle of strict construction. 

SECTION 1.— The Claims of Slavery. 
Modern date of the supposed "compromise." Remarkable process 
of proving it. Strict Construction defined. " Persons held to 
service and labor." Apportionment of " representatives and di- 
rect taxes." <•' Migration and importation." Suppression of 
insurrection. Protection against domestic violence. Reserved 
rights of the States 18 

SECTION 2.— The Claims of Liberty. 

The Preamble, Union, Justice, Domestic Tranquility, Common De- 
fence, General Welfare, Security of Liberty. Powers of Con- 
gress. Powers over Commerce. A Republican form of Gov- 

• ernment, (definitions of a Republic by various authorities.) Se- 
curity of Liberty,**' due process of law." Slavery in the Terri- 
tories and Federal District. The Constitution and the District of 
Columbia. Restrictions on State power. Inhibition of "bills 
of attainder," "laws impairing the obligation of contracts," 
"titles of nobility," (aristocracies, feudalism) "making war," 
"troops in f me of peace." Immunitiesof citizens in eat 
The summing up. Shylock and his pound of flesh. Conclusion. 



38 



CHAPTER III. 
pirit of the Constitution. The Constitution of 1787-9, con- 
sidered IN THE LIGHT OF ITS SPIRIT, ITS OBJECTS, ITS PURPOSES, 
ITS PRINCIPLES, ITS AIMS. 

SECTION 1.— Preliminaries. 
Spirit of the Constitution defined. Its province and authority, as a 
rule of construction. An obvious but neglected distinction 



M 



SECTION 2. 
Spirit of the Constitution, as manifested by the instrument itself—by 
its Preamble— its grant of powers— its construction of the I ci.c- 
ral Government— its care of personal rights— its provisions hos- 
tile to slavery— its affinity to Common Law. Specimens of Com- 
mon Law. Its power °3 



160 TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

SECTION 3. 

Spirit of the Constitution, as attested by History, by Civilians and 
Jurists. Extent of the National power 102 

SECTION 4. 
The Constitution construed. The "Spirit of the Constitution" on the 
Wool-Sack H4 

SECTION 5. 

Special pleadings— their fallacy 120 

CHAPTER IV. 

Or the Legality of Slavery by the Constitutions of the Slate 
Statcs. 

State of the Question. Abolition of Slavery in Massachusetts. 
Slavery unconstitutional in Delaware. Is Slavery constitutional 
in Maryland ? Other States. North Carolina, South Carolina, 
Louisiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi. Conclusion.... 127 

CHAPTER V. 

The Declaration of Independence. 
The Charter of Liberty, but never claimed by Slavery. The Decla- 
ration a part of American Constitutional Law. Proofs of (his po- 
sition. A constitution of government defined. The Constitution 
of 1776 still unrepealed. Historical facts. The Alternative. The 
Declaration of Independence, if the act of the separate States, 
equally fatal to legal slavery. The Declaration, never repudiated 
by the slave States, is still binding upon them 134 

CHAPTER VI. 
Of Slavery under Colonial Authority. Its Legality ques- 
tioned » 142 

CHAPTER VII. 
Nature and foundation of Government and Law. 
Parchments,papers,precedents. Whence their authority ? Compacts— 
on whom binding? Government as an ordinance of God. The 
41 Social Compact'' an exploded fiction. A more substantial theory 
needed. Where shall we find it? Civil government a science? 
compared with other sciences. Has its foundation in facts. Na- 
ture and relations of man. Scripture prophecy. First principles 
immutable. Can not be set aside by compacts and parchments. 
Recognizedby Common Law. What is Common Law? Whence 
its paramount power? One universal law. Founded on the Di- 
vine Will. Constitution of civil government not arbitrary. Ab- 
surdities can not become law. Law can not be created by man — 
can only be discovered, obeyed, and applied. Harmony of our 
National Documents with these principles. Objections answer- 
ed 14 & 



SYNOPTICAL INDEX 

OF THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION OF 1787-9, I 
BEARING ON SLAVERY, AS EXHIEITED IN THE 
PRECEDING VIEW. 



I. — Portions of the document claimed as being inconsistejit 
icith Slavery, or authorizing its abolition by the National 
Government. 

1. — Object of the Constitution. 
" We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more peffpc- t 
Union, establis h ji^tjjpe, ensure d omes tic tranquility, provide forjbe 
commo.n defence, promote the g enera l welfare, and secure thcblfssi 
Ijb er lylo o urslh 'cs anaour pos&£ity, do ordain and establish this C 
tiuion for fn"e~United States of America.-*-"— [Preamble.]— See pages 7, 
40, 84, 97. 

2. — Powers Conferred. 
" This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be 
made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall he made, 
under theriuthority of the United States, shall be the supreme laic of the 
land, and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any thing in 
the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding." 
—[Article 6, Clause 2.]— See pages 41, 96, 109, 110, 113. 

f ' The Congress shall have power"—" To regulate commerc e with for- 
ei gn natio ns, and among the s everal Stag es. amTwith the Indian trihg s."* 
—lA"rt.1, Sect. 8, Clause 3.]— See pages 43, 96. ' ' " 

" To exercise exclusive legislatio n, in all case s whatsoeve r over s,uch 
district (not exceeding ten miles sqiiarei as niayT by cession of particular 
States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of government of 
the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purcha s e d, 
by the consent of the le gislatu re of the State in which the same shall be, 
for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals', dock-ya rds, and oth er nee^d - 
ful build ings."'— [ArT. 1, S~ecC. 8, ClausTlG.]— See pages ' 

" To make all laic s which shall be necessary and proper for carrying 
into execution the loregoing po\vers v an 1 all other powers vested by this 



-bnstituuon in the government of the United States, or in any depart- 
ment or officer thereof.'-*— [Article 1, Secti&nS, Clause 17.]— See pages 
41, 84, 96. 

" The Congress shall have power to dispose of, and make all needful 
rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belong- 
ing to the United States,-' Sec— {Article 4. Sect. 3, Clause 2.]- 
63,96. 

3.— Inhibitions or limitations of State Powr.u. 
" No State shall"— "pass any bills of attainder, ex post facto law, or law 
impairing the obligation of contracts, a 
[Art. 1, Sect. 10, Clause 1.]— See page 68, kc, 96. 

" No State shall, without the consejjL-of Cong:. jjroops, or 

ships of war in time of peace,"/—" or engage invar, unless actually in- 
vaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay."— 
1, Sect. 10, Clause 2.]— See pages 68, 75, 96. 

11 



6 



lt>2 rJ l/W^OPTICAL INDEX. 

" The citizens of e7c/t State shall _be.eTV ,jt]e[] I fa a, !' *b p P r ' v npr^ q P "' 1 
imrn'mituTs" of cfiizc.-n, i a the several States.'* — [Article 4, Section 2, 
ffiause 1.] — ^ee pages 73, 96. 

• 

" The r*/i/'t\7 State* shall <rua_r.tnty- to every State in this Union a rcpub- 
wanfonnof government," ^c. — [Article 4, Sect. 4.]— See pages 46, 90. 

4.— Guaranties of the rights of individuals, under Com- 
mon Law. 

"The right of the people to be semrc in their pcrs^is, houses, papers, 
and effects, against unr eason able s earches ai\d seizure s, shall not be vio a- 
ted; and no warrants s1jo.II ^ssse but u'i')on prnbabTc cause, supported by 
oa'h or affirmation, ail particularly describing the place to be searched, 

and the persons or things to be seized. 5 -" — [Amendments, Article 4.1 — See 
pages 94, 96. 

"No person _ s hall be v — "deprived of life, liberty, or property, without 
due process of law," bec— [Amendments,- Article 5.] — See pages 58, 93, 95. 

Q "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, 

^ or prohibiting' the free (xercise thereof, or abi'ulz'in^'the freedom of speech, 

I or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to 

Jjt, petition the government for a redress of grievances." — [Amendments, 

Article 1.]— See pages 91, 96. 

* 5.— Further Recognitions of Common Law. 

>/i,(pd " The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, 
~ unless when, in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safetjltaay re- 
quire it." — ^Article 1, Sect. 9, Clause 2.] 

"No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed."— [lb. 
Clause 3.]— See page 96. 

"The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by 
jury, and such trial shall be he'd in the State where the said crime shall 
have been committed,'- ice— [Article 3, Sect. 2, Clause 3.]— See page 95. 

"Treason against the United States shall consist onlu_ i n k v lin g tear 
against tli&jn . or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and cam- 
fort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of 
two Witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open cou 
[Article 3, Sect. 3, Clause l.]-^See pages 33, 95. 

" The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, 
but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture, ex- 
cept during the life of the person attainted. — [lb. Clause 2.] 

"The President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United 
States, shall be removed from office, on impeachment for, and conviction of, 
treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."— [Article 2. 
Sect. 4.] 

" In suits at Common /au\.where the value in controversy shall exceed 
twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact 
tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined, in any court of the United 
States, than according to the rules of the Common law."— [Amendments, 
Article 7.]— See page 93. 

" Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed 
cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." — [Amendments, Article 8 
See page 93. 

" The enumeration, in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be 
construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.-- -[Amend- 
ments, Article 9.] 



nor \ u 4 




SYNOPTICAL INDEX. 163 

"In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right to a 
peedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the Stale ami d strict 
wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district thai I havo 
been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and 
cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the w 
to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in 1 
have assistance of counsel for his defence." — [Amendments, Articled 
See page 93. 

6.— Qualifications of Voters and Officers. 
No distinction of color, of race, or of parentage is specified in i lie Con- N ^"\ 

stitution, among the qualifications either of voters or officers.— See pajres y j*j i 

86, 83. 5>\S 

mw v*5F?£S£ 

and d irect taxes shall be apportioncdamong th d^ O' 
iy be ihCITU'ed within tins L nmn, "accc n'mu ■*'■ • 



II. — Portions of the Document claimed by the slaveholders Ja* Jr^ J* 
as bei?iz&%i(Ara}it&ai^lav«By J or a a iw ' cV < W»srf^rN 

faoor. Jffi* 

1 . — ' •' Representativ e s 
se veral States wni'crpmay 

their respective numbers, which shall be determined by gu iding t () t no 
whole number of free persons, including thoscb puml to -r "^~ ■ • 

term of years, ami ex Huding " Indians not taxed, th ree -nfilT sj>f alj^other^-^ir z 
persons," &c. — [Article J, ^'eH72, Clause 3.]— See pages Ji7, a '• 

2. — "The migration or importation of such persons as any of the States 
now existing shall think proper to admit,' Snail not be 1 prohibited by the 
CoiYgress, prior to the year one thousand eight bun lied and eight, "but a 
tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ' t*"dol-_ 
lars for each person.'-" — [Article I, Sect. 9, Clause 1.]— See pages 28yo9. ^-^ 

3. — "No perso n held to servi ce or labor in one State, under thelaws ^huy * 

thereof, e scaping into a"hbtherZ shall,"in consequence of any la *y -^/ 
lation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be de- , * ' t<- 

livered up on claim of the party to whom such service or iabor may be **£~^y 
due." — [Article 4, Sect . 2. Clause 3.] — See page 21. —^ / - 7/ 

4.— "The po\v^rsrfo fcleIcgaicd to the United States byTheConstitu - ~7~~J~^^ 
tion, nor prohibited by it to the Slates. ate reserved 10 The " "" li/7 , ~~ 

spectively, or to the people.'" — [Amendments, Article 10.]— .-ec page 37.* ' 

5.— a Congress shall have power" — i: to provide for calling forth the 
militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrcctiu..s and rege l 
invasions.'' — Article 1, Sect. 8, Clause 14.]— see page 3U. 

6. — "The United States [shall guaranty to every State in this Unio n a 
re publican form of government aml^TriaH protect e ach ot themagai: 
vaswn, ami on application of the legislature, or ol the executive, (when 
the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence." — [Article 
4, Sect. 4.1— See page 35. 



;M 



